Alleged ‘al-Qaeda-supported’ plot against Via Passenger Train from Toronto to New York Foiled … Two Individuals Arrested

EVIL TWARTED AGAIN,  THIS TIME NORTH OF THE BORDER IN CANADA …

Two men have been arrested and are accused of conspiring to carry out an “al-Qaeda supported” attack targeting a Via passenger train in the Greater Toronto Area. The two would be terrorists are Chiheb Esseghaier, 30, of Montreal, and Raed Jaser, 35, from Toronto. RCMP officials said the two accused were plotting to derail a Via passenger train. VIA is Canada’s equivalent of Amtrak and operates passenger rail services on track owned primarily by Canadian National Railway Co. According to a Reuters report, U.S. law enforcement and national security sources said the alleged plot targeted a rail line between Toronto and New York.

Police say they have arrested two men accused of conspiring to carry out an “al-Qaeda supported” attack targeting a Via passenger train in the Greater Toronto Area, following a cross-border investigation that involved Canadian and American law enforcement.

In a press conference that followed a report by CBC’s Greg Weston, police named the two accused as Chiheb Esseghaier, 30, of Montreal, and Raed Jaser, 35, from Toronto. They have been charged with conspiracy to carry out a terrorist attack and “conspiring to murder persons unknown for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a terrorist group.”

RCMP officials said the two accused were plotting to derail a passenger train. Jennifer Strachan, chief superintendent of RCMP criminal operations in the province of Ontario, said the two suspects watched trains and railways in the Greater Toronto Area.

“We are alleging that these two individuals took steps and conducted activities to initiate a terrorist attack,” she told reporters.

Statement From RCMP On Canadian Terror Arrest:

Today, the RCMP arrested two individuals and charged them with conspiring to carry out a terrorist attack against a VIA passenger train. The accused have been charged under sections 248, 235 (1), 83.2, 83.18, 83.21 of the Criminal Code of Canada. As a result of extensive collaborative efforts, the RCMP was able to disrupt the threat early. While the RCMP believed that these individuals had the capacity and intent to carry out these criminal acts, there was no imminent threat to the general public, rail employees, train passengers or infrastructure.

The two accused, Chiheb ESSEGHAIER and Raed JASER, who live in the Montreal and Toronto area were conspiring to carry out a terrorist attack against a VIA passenger train. Charges include conspiring to carry out an attack against, and conspiring to murder persons unknown for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a terrorist group.

As Legal Insurrection reminds us of President Barack Obama’s false rhetoric … I guess it depends on what the meaning of “decimated” is. Where is the Obama propaganda media criticizing him for his “declaring victory” over ‘al-Qaeda, when its obvious nothing could be further from the truth.

Good grief, these friggin Islamist terrorist are like cockroaches.

Six Americans Killed in Afghanistan … 3 U.S. Military Service Members, 2 U.S. Civilians and a Doctor

Six American troops and civilians and an Afghan doctor were killed in attacks on Saturday in southern and eastern Afghanistan. The attacks and deaths took place on the same day that U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrived in Afghanistan for a visit aimed to assess the level of training that American troops can provide to Afghan security forces after international combat forces complete their withdrawal at the end of 2014. One would say a lot, wouldn’t they? The terrorists are just waiting out the Obama’s troop withdrawal and then at that point Afghanistan will become an “Islamist” killing field.

Six American troops and civilians and an Afghan doctor were killed in attacks on Saturday in southern and eastern Afghanistan as the U.S. military’s top officer began a weekend visit to the country, officials said.

In the south, three U.S. service members, two U.S. civilians and the doctor were killed when a suicide bomber detonated a car full of explosives just as a convoy with the international military coalition drove past another convoy of vehicles carrying the governor of Zabul province.

Another American civilian was killed in an insurgent attack in eastern Afghanistan, the U.S. military said in a statement. [...]

Those killed in Zabul province included three members of the military and two U.S. civilians, including at least one employee with the U.S. State Department, said a U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity ahead of a formal announcement. Several other Americans and Afghans, possibly as many as nine, were wounded, the official said.

The U.S. Embassy in Kabul confirmed that Americans were involved in an attack in Qalat, the capital of Zabul province. Zabul is next to Kandahar, the birthplace of the Taliban, and shares a volatile border with Pakistan.

Political Correctness: AP Stylebook Revises Definition of ‘Islamist’ as AP Caves PC Pressures … Term “Islamist,” Will No Longer Be Used To Describe “Islamic Fighters, Militants, Extremists Or Radicals”

If it looks like an Islamist, walks like an Islamist and talks like an Islamist, geuess what AP … It’s an Islamist.

Remember when the journalist news used to be about reporting the news and not about worrying whether someone felt uncomfortable? Now the AP wants to redefine the enemy of the United States. How about a new definition for the AP … gutless, politically correct cowards?

This is yet another example why many have no trust or respect in the MSM. Just days after  dropping “illegal immigrant” from its influential stylebook, the Associated Press has revised its definition of another politically charged term, Islamist. The AP stated that it will no longer use the term ”Islamist” to describe  an Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals. Instead, the AP now defines an ”Islamist” as an “advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Of course this was a result of the cowards at AP succumbing to the pressures of CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

Yup, here is one of the Islamists that the AP refuses to define as an Islamic Fighters, Militants, Extremists Or Radicals

Following on the heels of the Tuesday decision by The Associated Press to discontinue use of the term “illegal immigrant,” the news agency on Thursday revised its stylebook entry for another politically charged term.   The term “Islamist,” the AP clarified in a Thursday afternoon alert to online stylebook subscribers, should not be used as “a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals.”

“Islamist” is frequently used as a label for conservative Islamic political movements, particularly Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, the group’s Palestinian offshoot. It generally carries a negative connotation.

The AP first added the term to its stylebook in 2012. The definition initially read:

Supporter of government in accord with the laws of Islam. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.

Just how gutless and politically correct has the AP become? These folks are more worried about if they upset terrorists than they are in correctly and accurately reporting the news. If these jokers were around in the 1940′s I am guessing that they would have provided cute and flowery definitions for the term Nazi’s and fascists.

Sorry, but we will continue to use the term “Islamist” as it is meant to be and for effect we will add the term radical jihad Islamist fascist for effect.

Suleiman Abu Ghaith, Son-in-Law of Osama bin Laden Faces Conspiracy Charges in New York City Court … GOP Blasts Obama for Trying Case in Federal Civilian Court

The Obama administration just will never learn …

Suleiman Abu Ghaith, a son-in-law of Osama bin Laden will be arraigned Friday in a New York City federal court only blocks away from the spot where the World Trade Center buildings once stood. He will appear in a New York court Friday to face charges that he conspired to kill Americans in his role as al-Qaida’s top propagandist.  Once again the Obama administration is hell-bent on trying this terrorist in a criminal court rather than in a military tribunal in GITMO. Abu Ghaith initially was picked up in Turkey, then deported to Jordan and brought to the United States in the last few days. However,  Suleiman Abu Ghaith will now be provided with all of the rights of any criminal in US courts and will be lawyered up to the hilt.

A son-in-law of Osama bin Laden faces arraignment on Friday in a federal court in New York, where he is charged with conspiracy to kill Americans.

Suleiman Abu Ghaith, a militant who appeared in videos representing al Qaeda after the September 11, 2001 attacks, was arrested in Turkey and brought to New York City to stand trial, U.S. government sources said.

Abu Ghaith is one of the highest-ranking al Qaeda figures to be brought to the United States to face a civilian trial.

“Among other things, Abu Ghaith urged others to swear allegiance to bin Laden, spoke on behalf of and in support of al Qaeda’s mission, and warned that attacks similar to those of September 11, 2001 would continue,” according to the indictment, which was announced on Thursday.

It accuses him of acting in a conspiracy that “would and did murder United States nationals anywhere in the world,” listing actions before and after September 11, 2001.

When will Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama learn that you don’t try a terrorist as a common criminal?

UPDATE I: Republicans blast Obama administration for New York trial of al Qaeda spokesman

Republicans say he should be held at the Guantanamo Bay prison camp and tried by a military tribunal, not a federal civilian court.

They say the administration is putting New York at risk of terrorist attack by holding the trial there and warn security costs will run in the millions of dollars.

“Gitmo, a naval vessel, Guam, anywhere other than New York, and anything other than a civilian trial. Safety is one issue, convenience to otherwise innocent people who live and work near the U.S. district court,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) told Fox’s Greta Van Susteren.

UNREAL … Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified Obama Was ABSENT Night of Benghazi Massacre … Obama AWOL

Barack Obama: The Absentee Commander in Chief …

After all these months, we finally learn that President Barack Obama was no where to be found the night that the Consulate was attacked in Benghazi, Libya and four Americans were killed. Is it any wonder why Obama and his complicit MSM did not want to make this an issue prior to the 2012 Presidential elections. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta testified on Capitol Hill that President Barack Obama was absent the night four Americans were murdered, including US Ambassador Stevens, in Benghazi on September 11, 2012. They were left on their own.

Panetta said, though he did meet with Obama at a 5 o’clock prescheduled gathering, the president left operational details, including knowledge of what resources were available to help the Americans under siege, “up to us.”

In fact, Panetta says that the night of 9/11, he did not communicate with a single person at the White House. The attack resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens.

Obama did not call or communicate in anyway with the defense secretary that night. There were no calls about what was going on in Benghazi. He never called to check-in.

The 5 o’clock meeting was a pre-scheduled 30-minute session, where, according to Panetta’s recollection, they spent about 20 minutes talking a lot about the American embassy that was surrounded in Egypt and the situation that was just unfolding in Benghazi.

Obama was absent as Americans were under assault in a massacre, yet he found time to make a phone call to save his political bacon to defuse a controversy about President Obama’s refusal to meet with Netanyahu two weeks later.

But Obama did have time to make a political call to the Israeli prime minister. “[W]e do know one thing the president found time to do that evening: He placed a call to Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu in order to defuse a controversy about President Obama’s refusal to meet with Netanyahu two weeks later at the U.N. General Assembly, and, according to the White House announcement that evening, spent an hour on the phone with him,” Kristol wrote.

More from Rush Limbaugh. Barack Obama could hardly seem to be bothered with the massacre that was taking place. How aloof could one possibly be? A US Ambassador is under attack and missing and Obama could really care less. How would the MSM treat this story if a Republican had been president when a US Ambassador was murdered? Does anyone think that maybe they would have covered the story and asked the administration why they are trying to cover up what happened?

AYOTTE: Did he ask you how long it would take to deploy assets –

PANETTA: No.

AYOTTE: — including armed aviation to the area?

PANETTA: He — he basically said, “Do whatever. Do whatever you need to do to be able to protect, uhhh, our people there.” He just left that up to us.

AYOTTE: Did you have any further communications with him that night?

PANETTA: No.

RUSH: “No.” So Obama votes “present.” I guess this means they weren’t in the Situation Room. Obama voted “present.” He said, “Nah, you guys do whatever you need to do.” Well, why didn’t anybody do anything then? I mean, clearly, if the president says, “Do what you need to do to protect our people there,” and they weren’t protected, then why didn’t they do it? So up next we have Senator Ted Cruz. During the Q&A, Cruz and Panetta had this exchange..