Get PJ Media on your Apple

Ordered Liberty

The Washington Post Notices that Iran Harbors Al-Qaeda—as Al-Qaeda Leaves Iran

February 20th, 2014 - 1:50 pm

so_long_iran_2-20-14-1

The Washington Post finds it newsworthy that senior al-Qaeda figures are leaving (or being shown the door in) Iran. Obviously, it is an interesting development … but one is constrained to ask why the Post did not seem to think it much of a story that Iran was harboring al-Qaeda leaders in the first place.

Iran, as our friend Michael Ledeen has repeatedly observed (most recently, here), is the chief sponsor of jihadism in the world. That it is a Shiite jihadist regime has not made much difference where the West is concerned: the mullahs have trained, supplied, financed and harbored Sunni jihadists – al-Qaeda and Hamas prominently among them – for over 20 years. This is the most outrageous aspect of the U.S. government’s negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program, negotiations conducted by both the Bush and Obama administrations. The regime’s nuclear ambitions have been compartmentalized from its terror facilitation, notwithstanding that it is the regime’s propagation of revolutionary jihad that makes its potential acquisition of nukes so intolerable. We do not sit up at night worrying about, say, India’s nuclear weapons. We have anxiety over Iran because for its regime, “Death to America” is not a slogan, it is a ruthlessly pursued goal.

This is why Michael and I, among not nearly enough others, have urged for a decade that the problem in Iran is the regime, not the nukes, and that any sensible American foreign policy should make regime change in Iran an imperative. This has never necessarily meant a military invasion of Iran (although that option should always be on the table – not as saber-rattling but as something the mullahs become convinced is a realistic possibility). It has simply meant that we should have organized every aspect of American foreign policy – military, intelligence, economic, and diplomatic – on strangling the regime until it is deposed, hopefully by the Iranian people themselves but by external forces if that’s what it takes.

The mullahs gave their al-Qaeda allies a soft place to land after the post-9/11 U.S. invasion. Naturally, some see the apparent al-Qaeda exodus from Iran as a hopeful sign that Obama’s amateur-hour rapprochement gambit is working. But of course, it has nothing to do with that. What the president is doing, as observed by none other than Iran’s “moderate” president Hassan Rouhani, is a slow-motion surrender – and note that, only a day ago, Tehran’s jihadist-in-chief, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called for “economic jihad” against the West. Iran has no incentive to help what Khamenei continues to call “the enemy,” the United States, against its erstwhile ally, al-Qaeda – and if it did, as Michael Rubin points out, it would be handing the al-Qaeda leaders over to us, not allowing them to return to places whether they can direct jihadist violence against us.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
I'm prepared, Larry...to go wherever the truth leads.

My motto is this: Tyranny cannot survive a free and fair media, freedom cannot survive a conspiratorial one.

IF this cabal had been held accountable, they would not be trying to gang rape the Constitution and crush citizen's rights and put monitors in the press rooms, jail innocent people, sic the IRS on political dissidents, ...they WOULD NOT TRY THESE THINGS.

It is precisely because the media is an active co-conspirator, along with the Democratic PARTY, unions, academia, Hollywood...that we now have open and notorious acts of treason.

Do I "want" to go there?

I'm forced to go there...if I love my country and want to see it saved.

Do I think that this cabal is selling out America and Israel....you're damn right I do.

Do I think the co-conspirators should be tried for treason and hang? I will help build the gallows.

Do I "want" to go there?

We are already there...this plane has been hijacked. Let's roll.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
Now that we know that the whole Benghazi Big Lie was a CIA led fibfest, we have to ask why. The nonsense that it would weaken the notion that al Qaeda was on the run and cause blowback because it wasn't true is clearly completely off base. It's obvious to anyone with a functional IQ that al Qaeda is not on the run...and where is the blowback? There is none and never would have been. Candy Crowley and her lap dance for Obama aside, it wasn't about how strong Al Qaeda was. It was the WHAT WERE WE DOING THAT NEEDED INTENSE HIDING.

Why would Morell lead that pack of lies? Why would he show up as Rice's mouthpiece? Why would Obama and Clinton hide for days? Why make a show trial out of a known innocent man and jail him for a year?

The extreme nature of the reaction and Hillary's hyper-frantic response that it didn't matter, GET IT OUT OF MY FACE, it doesn't matter...should have everyone's antennae up...but instead they all fell asleep at the sound of the decoy.

Why is Obama dead set on giving Iran the rollover deal of the century? Why is he fighting for the Muslim Brotherhood?

Why is the FCC asserting that it can go into PRINT newsrooms?

We aren't connecting the dots, we are too busy falling for the red herrings.

Monitors in our news rooms? Can you fathom the reaction if a Nixon , Reagan or Bush spied on the AP, sicced the IRS on a news reporter and political dissedents, dropped drone missiles on American citizens, rewrote laws on the fly and stuck monitors in news rooms? The rage would be nightly and the streets would be filled with angry mobs.

WE react like we have a mild case of acid reflux.

By the grace of God...why are we still sitting down? People should hang for this treason. Our tepid response is going to destroy us.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
The axis of of Islamic terrorism has Iran at one end and Saudi Arabia at the other.

If we aren't going to be serious about fighting both (and apparently we are not, since we grovel to the Saudis every chance we get), might as well let them fight each other.



39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (13)
All Comments   (13)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
just as Eddie answered I am inspired that someone can get paid $4579 in 4 weeks on the computer . look at here now.....WWW.JOBSZT.COM
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
Where are those who follow Muhammad going? Atlantis Paradise island?
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
IMHO, the departure of some AQ from Iran means at most that the Iranian government is using a tactic from that old Persian game of Chess: sacrificing a pawn.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
While we can attribute many evil actions and intentions towards Iran, it is impossible to believe that Iran would arm and fund an 'al Qaeda' that it blames (along with Israel) for blowing up Shiite targets in Lebanon. It is one thing to posit, as those like Yosef Bodansky did in his book on Bin Ladin, that there is anti-Infidel cooperation between the IRI and al Qaeda elements. That makes sense. To quote anti-Shiite events in Lebanon as proof of Iran's friendliness with al Qaeda simply makes no sense. The only way to make this claim plausible - that Tehran directly supports those fighting Hizbollah, Assad and Iran itself - is to imply that the Shiite revolutionary gov't is completely insane. It's not.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
Now that we know that the whole Benghazi Big Lie was a CIA led fibfest, we have to ask why. The nonsense that it would weaken the notion that al Qaeda was on the run and cause blowback because it wasn't true is clearly completely off base. It's obvious to anyone with a functional IQ that al Qaeda is not on the run...and where is the blowback? There is none and never would have been. Candy Crowley and her lap dance for Obama aside, it wasn't about how strong Al Qaeda was. It was the WHAT WERE WE DOING THAT NEEDED INTENSE HIDING.

Why would Morell lead that pack of lies? Why would he show up as Rice's mouthpiece? Why would Obama and Clinton hide for days? Why make a show trial out of a known innocent man and jail him for a year?

The extreme nature of the reaction and Hillary's hyper-frantic response that it didn't matter, GET IT OUT OF MY FACE, it doesn't matter...should have everyone's antennae up...but instead they all fell asleep at the sound of the decoy.

Why is Obama dead set on giving Iran the rollover deal of the century? Why is he fighting for the Muslim Brotherhood?

Why is the FCC asserting that it can go into PRINT newsrooms?

We aren't connecting the dots, we are too busy falling for the red herrings.

Monitors in our news rooms? Can you fathom the reaction if a Nixon , Reagan or Bush spied on the AP, sicced the IRS on a news reporter and political dissedents, dropped drone missiles on American citizens, rewrote laws on the fly and stuck monitors in news rooms? The rage would be nightly and the streets would be filled with angry mobs.

WE react like we have a mild case of acid reflux.

By the grace of God...why are we still sitting down? People should hang for this treason. Our tepid response is going to destroy us.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
Spot on, Bleachers. Spot on.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
Yes, but maybe there are other reasons the Administration(s) don't want to tie Iran to al Qaeda. They could be dark reasons indeed. Are you prepared to go there? My guess would be 'not.'
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
I'm prepared, Larry...to go wherever the truth leads.

My motto is this: Tyranny cannot survive a free and fair media, freedom cannot survive a conspiratorial one.

IF this cabal had been held accountable, they would not be trying to gang rape the Constitution and crush citizen's rights and put monitors in the press rooms, jail innocent people, sic the IRS on political dissidents, ...they WOULD NOT TRY THESE THINGS.

It is precisely because the media is an active co-conspirator, along with the Democratic PARTY, unions, academia, Hollywood...that we now have open and notorious acts of treason.

Do I "want" to go there?

I'm forced to go there...if I love my country and want to see it saved.

Do I think that this cabal is selling out America and Israel....you're damn right I do.

Do I think the co-conspirators should be tried for treason and hang? I will help build the gallows.

Do I "want" to go there?

We are already there...this plane has been hijacked. Let's roll.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
Another thing, speaking of al Qaeda, I keep hearing that al Qaeda is in Afcrapistan so that's why we need to keep on staying in Afcrapistan, and that al Qaeda is in Iraq so that's why we should never have left there and should now go back to Iraq and stay there too. Sometimes I feel like I'm on a Merry go Round.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
"This is why Michael and I, among not nearly enough others, have urged for a decade that the problem in Iran is the regime, not the nukes, and that any sensible American foreign policy should make regime change in Iran an imperative."

You see the problem with that, and it's not necessarily that you are all wet, or even a little wet, is that I just don't think doing that will be very salable after our not so excellent Muslim adventures in both Iraq and Afcrapistan. After 9/11 Bush decided to go after Afcrapistan and not Saudi Arabia, and Iraq and not Iran, and now I just don't think going to war in Muslim countries seems like all that brilliant an idea to most people.

And, of course, Obama himself would be more likely to go after you and Mr. Leeden than the regime in Iran anyway. He probably doesn't consider either of you much of a threat to his regime, but by whatever amount he does, it's that much more than the threat he feels from Iran.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
The axis of of Islamic terrorism has Iran at one end and Saudi Arabia at the other.

If we aren't going to be serious about fighting both (and apparently we are not, since we grovel to the Saudis every chance we get), might as well let them fight each other.



39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Iran, as our friend Michael Ledeen has repeatedly observed (most recently, here), is the chief sponsor of jihadism in the world."

I think a much better case could be made that it's Saudi Arabia. Of course, that would ruffle more than a few 'oily feathers'.
39 weeks ago
39 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All