Sources: Air Strike in Yemen May Have Killed Imam Who Inspired Fort Hood Shooter, Two Top Al Qaeda Officials
Sources tell ABC News that an air raid in Yemen this morning may have killed two top al Qaeda officials as well as an imam believed to have inspired the alleged Fort Hood shooter.
Those believed to have been present at the target in the eastern province Shabwa included the leader of Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, Nasser al-Wahayshi, his No. 2, Saeed al-Shehri, and Anwar al-Awlaki, who was quoted telling Al Jazeera Web that Maj. Nidal Hasan, asked him "about killing U.S. soldiers and officers. His question was is it legitimate" under Islamic law.
Awlaki said the query was a year before the Fort Hood shooting, making him "astonished. Where was American intelligence that claimed once that it can read any car plate number anywhere in the world?"
The sources would not get into whether the air raid was conducted by US or Yemeni forces.
US officials are still seeking confirmation that the raid definitively killed the three men.
Earlier this year, al-Wahayshi, a Yemeni, called for shariah law for Yemen. "The time for the rule of Islam has come so that you could bask in the justice and tolerance it brings," he said. He described the president of Yemen, Ali Abdullah Saleh, who has cooperated with the US in fighting al Qaeda, as "an infidel and an agent … and today he is using all forms of oppression with the pretext of preserving unity."
Last month al-Wahayshi called for attacks on Western airports and trains. Writing in an e-magazine Sada al-Malahem, al-Wahayshi told supporters, "You do not need to exert great effort or spend a lot of money to make 10 grams of explosives, more or less. Do not spend a long time searching for materials as they already exist in your mother's kitchen. Make them (bombs) in the shape of a bomb you hurl, or detonate through a timer or a remote detonator or a martyrdom-seeker belt or any electrical appliance."
Saeed al-Shehri, a Saudi and former detainee at Guantanamo, was transferred to the Saudi government by the administration of President George W. Bush on November 9, 2007. He went through jihadi rehab at the "Prince Mohammed bin Nayef Centre for Care and Counseling," where participants undergo a 12-step program to prepare them to return to society. Al-Shehri instead returned to al Qaeda.
Anwar al-Awlaki was born in New Mexico. He attended Colorado State University, earned a master's degree in educational leadership from San Diego State University, and worked on a Ph.D. in human resource development at George Washington University.
Former FBI agent Brad Garrett, now an ABC News consultant, told ABC News that "Awlaki is known as a senior recruiter for al Qaeda. He would be the spiritual motivator. Almost like someone you would go to and say, 'this is what I'm thinking about doing.' And they join in and encourage you and basically help you rationalize your behavior."
-jpt
Email
Rick Santorum Sweeps 3 States
Pentagon to Open Additional Jobs to Women
So is Fort Hood considered a terrorist attack now?
Posted by: Marcus | December 24, 2009, 9:36 am 9:36 am
“ABC, CBS, CNN and the Obama Administration are at fault for the murders of the soldiers at Ft. Hood.”
Still no mention of the recent incidents on airlines regarding Muslims.
Posted by: The Audacity of Copenhagen | December 24, 2009, 9:37 am 9:37 am
Goody!
Posted by: bevmax | December 24, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am
“On behalf of the American people – including Muslim communities in all 50 states – I want to extend best wishes to Muslims in America and around the world. Ramadan Kareem.” – President Barack Obama, 8/21/09
Posted by: Live! From DC! It's Sat Night! | December 24, 2009, 10:08 am 10:08 am
I’m not a big Obama fan but if he had a hand in getting this done then some of my confidence in him will be restored. Talk about a great Christmas present!!! God bless our soldiers.
Posted by: Joe | December 24, 2009, 10:19 am 10:19 am
It’s beginning to look a lot like Christmas.
Posted by: Jack Burton | December 24, 2009, 11:01 am 11:01 am
The US Military, killing people who absolutely, positively deserve it. Thanks for all you do.
Posted by: 1Bwana | December 24, 2009, 11:31 am 11:31 am
Thank God we’re going after al-Qaeda and Taliban members and facilities wherever they are.
I hope we start taking out some of their wealthy Arab money suppliers as well.
Posted by: The_Mick | December 24, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am
WastingtonDC: If, indeed, this is traceable to the direct action order of our CINC, then millions of US military veterans, retired, active duty and reserve men and women will stand a little taller, walk into deadly combat with more satisfaction, and certainly enjoy the rest of President Obama’s tenure more than those, too many, days when we worried which proxy the emergent SinoRussianLevant energy blackmail alliance will use, next, in the deliberate testing of our President’s personal strengths, or weaknesses, announced earl on, by Joe Biden, as they squeeze, or shut down the Straits of Hormuz, or attack US interests, at home or abroad, again. Those of us who chortled, with a mixture of glee, pride and satisfaction, when we heard the hard left’s accusations, that perhaps GW Bush hung Saddam, more because of Saddam’s attempted assination of Bush 41, his daddy, than because of GW’s personal sense of tidying up a cold blooded mass murderer, will issue a similar ringing cheer of admiration, if our CINC has, in the short time since the Ft. Hood atrocity, done another of several calculated acts necessary to provide those foreign dictators who enslave about half our fellow humans our President’s personal assurance that he is perfectly capable of reaching out, and touching those who incite, support, or brag about, the terrorist murder of our CINC’s military personnel, citzens, or those of Pax American Coalition nations. There are some millions of us looking forward to another few hundred years when attacking American interests brings a strikingly similar action, to that used for the same purposes, by Teddy Roosevelt, and the earlier American heroes he followed into the White House. If Obama’s sensible insistance on doing the CINC’s duty, about targeting high level terror targets, in Pakistan, et al, has inspired the rest of America’s millions of military people, and their supporters, family, friends, as it has me and mine, imagine the chagrin the deadly enemies of freedom must be tasting right now, while our friends and allies stand up, cheering, with the leader of the free world, as he goes about purposeful direct action, to establish my Mother’s rule, that “Liberty and Justice for all,” means all humans, where ever found.
Posted by: Franklin D. Lomax Sr | December 24, 2009, 12:01 pm 12:01 pm
Where is the media investigation into “why” the White House is blocking the investigation into that Obama and Eric Holder knew about Major Hasan contacting terrorists overseas months before he shot 13 soldiers at Fort Hood? And that Obama and Eric Holder told the CIA, FBI and US Army to lay off of Major Hasan? Where is this media investigation?
Posted by: Peter King | December 24, 2009, 12:11 pm 12:11 pm
Major Hasan was in the military under Bush for YEARS and – despite Bush’s boasting about rooting out terrorists – was allowed to remain in the military.
According to the Washington Post, Hasan made a presentation titled “The Koranic World View As It Relates to Muslims” in the U.S. Military during his senior year of residency at Walter Reed.
The presentation recommended that the Department of Defense “should allow Muslims Soldiers the option of being released as “Conscientious objectors” to increase troop morale and decrease adverse events.”
Nothing was done on Bush’s watch to root out Hasan.
Again, this presentation was made ON GEORGE BUSH’s WATCH (June 2007), not Obama’s.
It seems Mr. Bush – the boastful rooter out of terrorists – missed this. And it seems your missing this too.
Lets give credit where credit is due.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 12:30 pm 12:30 pm
Don’t get too excited about Obama. The mass murderer at Ft Hood was one of the president’s members of homeland security. There’s a picture of him at a recent security meeting. That’s why news is so mum about him. As far as taking out Al Qaeda leaders,that’s what our military does and does it very well if they’re not restrained. Ben Lauden would have been taken out if Clinton hadn’t told the military not to do it. Clinton also had him released from holding earlier during his term. administration.
Posted by: Terry Carver | December 24, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
Anwar al-Awlaki is a native of Las Cruces, New Mexico.
The people of New Mexico have a lot of explaining to do about why they churned out such a psycho.
Posted by: Johann | December 24, 2009, 12:38 pm 12:38 pm
Of course tierra, let us do give credit where credit is due. Hasan was not found out while Bush was President; however, he didn’t kill anybody then either.
Posted by: Danger Dave | December 24, 2009, 12:44 pm 12:44 pm
this ordeal at fort hood is break of the ice. look out in american for all of these muslims our military and rest of leadership has let come our country. what are they really doing over here. digging information so they can destory us. lets wake up to this big game they playing that has cost so much money and lifes arms ect. we can’t replace what we lost over there. patrol our boarders over here and bring our people home nine years is enough time to get the job done i think. god bless you all.
washington get her done i don’t care what party you are from let’s get this over with.
doug mi.
Posted by: DOUG VAN CLEAVE | December 24, 2009, 12:56 pm 12:56 pm
Seasons Greetings from the United States.
The time for talk was apparently over.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 1:00 pm 1:00 pm
“Lets give credit where credit is due.”
Christian Science Monitor reports:
“…Yemeni planes killed an estimated 30 Al Qaeda suspects from Yemen and abroad in the southern Shabwa governorate, reported Yemen’s English-language Saba News outlet…”
Posted by: Mele Kalikimaka! | December 24, 2009, 1:13 pm 1:13 pm
Marcus”So is Fort Hood considered a terrorist attack now?”
I think it depends on who you ask. Most people in this country would say yes. I give it a weak yes. People in Muslim countries that have been on the receiving end of the Carter Doctrine, Operation Ajax, Iraqi Freedom, etc. would say that it is not.
Posted by: Huh | December 24, 2009, 1:24 pm 1:24 pm
-I hope we start taking out some of their wealthy Arab money suppliers as well.-
Not a chance. Barry likes them so much he bows.
Posted by: Daoud | December 24, 2009, 2:35 pm 2:35 pm
Tierra..using that logic 911 was Clinton’s issue? Sure you want to stand on that argument?
Posted by: S.Morgan | December 24, 2009, 3:05 pm 3:05 pm
Excellent!
Posted by: LongT | December 24, 2009, 3:21 pm 3:21 pm
Posted by: tierra | Dec 24, 2009 12:30:34 PM
It’s despicable that you would use the deaths of the innocents at Ft. Hood to make a political slam of Bush. The Bush-haters have no shame.
Posted by: Live! From D.C.! It's Saturday Night! | December 24, 2009, 3:50 pm 3:50 pm
using that logic 911 was Clinton’s issue? Sure you want to stand on that argument?
__________________________________
Bush and his supporters boast about rooting out the terrorists and protecting America – and thus in comparison Obama is a weakling, etc.
So far we know Bush failed at capturing Bin Laden and even after 9/11 he failed to detect Major Hasan despite Hasan’s public presentation (while in the U.S. military) that Muslims soldiers should be allowed the option of being released as “Conscientious objectors”.
We also know Bush left Afghanistan on the back burner while the Taliban and al Qaeda regrouped and became stronger.
My argument is despite the macho posturing, Bush was not that effective – and Obama shines in comparison.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 4:20 pm 4:20 pm
I tend to think that Obama is not responsible for any good that the troops do; his heart just isn’t in it. That was obvious in his Afghan speech.
Posted by: tanarg | December 24, 2009, 4:27 pm 4:27 pm
Terry Carver posted “Ben Lauden would have been taken out if Clinton hadn’t told the military not to do it. Clinton also had him released from holding earlier during his term. administration.”
Clinton had a standing order to take out Bin Laden. Also, that story about having him released is also a lie.
Posted by: Faurtz8 | December 24, 2009, 4:37 pm 4:37 pm
it is indisputable clintonj didn’t give the tanks req by the commander on scene in Somolia thus blackhawk down and needless loss of lives. that said good news we got a few more on our list
Posted by: bigal | December 24, 2009, 5:38 pm 5:38 pm
Terry Carver posted “Ben Lauden would have been taken out if Clinton hadn’t told the military not to do it. Clinton also had him released from holding earlier during his term. administration.”
Clinton had a standing order to take out Bin Laden. Also, that story about having him released is also a lie.
__________________________________
Thanks Faurtz8.
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 5:49 pm 5:49 pm
It is remarkable that for all the lectures Cheney gave us about terrorism, and what a wonderful job he and W. were doing, they let Saeed al-Shehri go.
Posted by: James Fox | December 24, 2009, 6:03 pm 6:03 pm
It is remarkable that for all the lectures Cheney gave us about terrorism, and what a wonderful job he and W. were doing, they let Saeed al-Shehri go.
Posted by: James Fox
————————————
If they detained him, the ACLU would had a field day….
Posted by: Reality2009 | December 24, 2009, 7:04 pm 7:04 pm
It is remarkable that for all the lectures Cheney gave us about terrorism, and what a wonderful job he and W. were doing, they let Saeed al-Shehri go.
Posted by: James Fox | Dec 24, 2009 6:03:57 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The ACLU and Eric Holder’s old law firm filed suit on his behalf, and the courts forced Bush to let him go. There are 90 more just like him about to be released to Yemen under Obama’s watch. 12 were released last week. They should have NEVER been released, but as we now have to give terrorists constitutional rights, there isn’t much choice……except to kill them when they’re captured.
Posted by: akw | December 24, 2009, 8:03 pm 8:03 pm
Terry Carver posted “Ben Lauden would have been taken out if Clinton hadn’t told the military not to do it. Clinton also had him released from holding earlier during his term. administration.”
Clinton had a standing order to take out Bin Laden. Also, that story about having him released is also a lie.
Posted by: Faurtz8 | Dec 24, 2009 4:37:46 PM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You’re dead wrong. Clinton refused to take him into custody because they didn’t have enough to convict him in our court system. Clinton let him go THREE TIMES. Those are facts, made public by people in his administration and by Clinton himself on an audio tape of an interview. Look it up……I heard him say it.
Posted by: akw | December 24, 2009, 8:07 pm 8:07 pm
Don’t get too excited about Obama. The mass murderer at Ft Hood was one of the president’s members of homeland security. There’s a picture of him at a recent security meeting. That’s why news is so mum about him. As far as taking out Al Qaeda leaders,that’s what our military does and does it very well if they’re not restrained. Ben Lauden would have been taken out if Clinton hadn’t told the military not to do it. Clinton also had him released from holding earlier during his term. administration.
Posted by: Terry Carver | Dec 24, 2009 12:37:15 PM
You are incorrect
Posted by: Jim Bob | December 24, 2009, 8:27 pm 8:27 pm
Our real enemy is not the ones living in a distant land whose names or policies we don’t understand. The real enemy is a system that wages war when it’s profitable, the CEOs who lay us off our jobs when it’s profitable, the insurance companies who deny us health care when it’s profitable, the banks who take away our homes when it’s profitable. Our enemies are not several thousand miles away. They are right here in front of us.
Posted by: Flash Override | December 24, 2009, 8:51 pm 8:51 pm
Posted by: Jim Bob | Dec 24, 2009 8:27:52 PM
Anybody who’s calling him “Ben” “Lauden” is obviously someone whose information cannot be fully trusted.
This is far more accurate . ..
“Clinton had a standing order to take out Bin Laden. Also, that story about having him released is also a lie.”
Posted by: Faurtz8 | Dec 24, 2009 4:37:46 PM
p.s. – it was Bush and Cheney who had al Qaeda and Bin Laden cornered in Afghanistan – and let them escape . .
Posted by: tierra | December 24, 2009, 8:57 pm 8:57 pm
…the CEOs who lay us off our jobs when it’s profitable, ….
______
Would that be the same CEOs who gave you a job in the first place? Seems like you should be about making it profitable to avoid being laid off. Better still, start your own business and hire others…
Posted by: tj | December 24, 2009, 10:32 pm 10:32 pm
Sources: Air Strike in Yemen May Have Killed Imam Who Inspired Fort Hood Shooter…
______
You mean the shooter was not just some PTSD nut job after all? He was acting on behalf of radical Islam? Shoot! I would never have thought it. Will he be prosecuted as a terrorist, or as just as dog-faced soldier gone wrong?
Posted by: tj | December 24, 2009, 10:58 pm 10:58 pm
Our real enemy is not the ones living in a distant land whose names or policies we don’t understand. The real enemy is a system that wages war when it’s profitable, the CEOs who lay us off our jobs when it’s profitable, the insurance companies who deny us health care when it’s profitable, the banks who take away our homes when it’s profitable. Our enemies are not several thousand miles away. They are right here in front of us.
Posted by: Flash Override |
What is the “system that wages war when it’s profitable”?
If your company is not making money what would you propose they do to pay you? Seek a government bailout?
What about the government who deny us health care? Is the government the real enemy too?
You advocating a system where the lenders have no recourse when loans are not repaid? It would look something like October 2008.
Which country would you say comes closest to your ideals? Cuba comes pretty close doesn’t it?
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | December 24, 2009, 11:00 pm 11:00 pm
Quite frankly, who cares if Ft. Hood is prosecuted as a terrorist attack or a mass murder. It is irrelevant. Either way, he gets sentenced to death and spends the rest of eternity rotting in hell.
As far as issues raised about our security systems allowing an American soldier to have long-term email relationships with known terrorists, you can rest assured that we’ve already gotten all the information we can get from this piece of dirt so he has no further value to us, regardless of whether you or I (or his court martial) think he is a terrorist or “just” a murderer.
Posted by: Ken J | December 25, 2009, 12:48 am 12:48 am
Don’t pop that bottle of champagne just yet. It is not certain that Anwar al-Awlaki was killed. But I emphatically hope he was. Of all the corpse-worshipping anglophone Sunni terrorists, none has more sycophants than al-Awlaki. He has many hundreds of admirers in England, in particular. The underground “tibyan” group there has been translating all of al-Awlaki’s stuff into other European languages. The American psycho Joey Cohen alias Yousuf al-Khattab is another malignancy who kowtows to al-Awlaki. Awlaki attracts scum the way you-know-what attracts flies.
Posted by: Kufr Akbar | December 25, 2009, 2:02 am 2:02 am
Although it is off topic, I have to call bull crap on those who keep repeating the bold-face lie about Bill Clinton passing up the chance to get Bin Laden in 1996. Read the 9/11 Commission report on the subject. There is no credible evidence that such an offer was made.
However, for the sake of this discussion, let’s assume the offer was made and let’s go even further through the looking glass and assume that it was NOT some disengenuous quid pro quo offer that was so unacceptable that it wasn’t even negotiated. Even then, the alleged offer was irrelevant. Bin Laden was not known to be terrorist “mastermind” in 1996. He was simply one of many people the CIA thought might be giving money to troublemakers and one against whom we had zero evidence of any illegal activites. I realize that a complete lack of evidence against even the most minor potential criminal elements never slowed the Bushies down, but most presidents take their oath of office seriously (you know when the president swears to DEFEND THE CONSTITUTION…). As a result, we had no legal means to jail or even try him for any crime. Even without evidence or even knowledge that Bin Laden was a particularly troublesome person, the U.S. still pressured the Sudan to extradite him to Saudi Arabia in the hopes that the Saudis would be willing to do what our laws wouldn’t allow (i.e. execute him without hard evidence). Unfortunately, the Saudis wouldn’t take him.
Once we had even a little bit of evidence (in 1998), Clinton issued standing orders to kill him whenever and wherever he could be located. Ironically enough, it was the republicans who screamed long and loud when Clinton tried to take Bin Laden out with cruise missles, claiming that he was firing at ghosts purely to draw attention away from the fact that Clinton had cheated on his wife.
Posted by: Ken J | December 25, 2009, 2:11 am 2:11 am
Live!
Bush was a putz and a grandstander with no balls. He drew pictures of trucks that may have existed in Iraq which may have contained WMD’s and you fell for it – Drawings no less – then he outsourced the capture of Bin Laden and couldn’t even find someone who could do the job, so he got away again.
Bush has done more to get Americans killed in Iraq than al Qaeda could have ever hoped to. Especially since Hussein kicked them out and was using the idea of WMD’s to keep his neighbors at bay.
Bushes lack of brains when if came to Iraq showed that he was about as sharp as a bat, and your falling for his cartoons of WMD’s shows you may well not be one of the sharp tools in the shed either.
Did you see the look on Bushes face when he was told that the World Trade Center was under attack. Now that’s the look of a whipped pup. And you people actually sympathized with the poor little boy with his hurt feelings while others died. You are a sad lot indeed.
Posted by: Bruce Williams | December 25, 2009, 10:32 am 10:32 am
All these people who look down their sissy noses at “profit” should turn their backs on the “profit makers” and leave the U.S.
Cuba is nice; a little humid, but otherwise just your cup of tea.
Bye!
Posted by: tanarg | December 25, 2009, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm
All these people who look down their sissy noses at “profit” should turn their backs on the “profit makers” and leave the U.S.
Posted by: tanarg
if ‘profit’ is the be all, end all, let’s repeal the child labor laws, abolish unions, bring back indentured servitude, no penalties or regulations on any biz that kills and maims via pollution or hazardous products, more ENRON, Madoff, oil speculation,
wall street crimes…
yeah baby, the good old days
Posted by: Rex | December 26, 2009, 1:03 am 1:03 am