By: Brent Parrish
There’s a terrorist group called “Khorasan,” and it’s super-secret. Apparently, it’s “double-secret probation” secret (if you know what I mean) … until now.
According to the New York Times, “There is almost no public information about the Khorasan group”:
It is difficult to assess the seriousness and scope of any terror plots that Khorasan, the Nusra Front or other groups in Syria might be planning. In several instances in the past year, Nusra and the Islamic State have used Americans who have joined their ranks to carry out attacks inside Syria — including at least one suicide bombing — rather than returning them to the United States to strike there.
Reportedly, the murky “Khorasan group” is an extremely dangerous terrorist organization planning imminent attacks against “American installations” and “U.S. interests,” yet the Obama Administration carefully avoids mentioning threats made by ISIS to attack America and its allies.
The administration is on-record numerous times saying ISIS did not pose a direct threat. DHS director Jeh Johnson recently reiterated this position in an interview, stating there is “no credible information ISIS planning to attack the United States.” By claiming the “Khorasan group” presents an “imminent threat,” the White House is engaging in a bit of semantic manipulation to cover themselves both politically and legally, in my opinion.
The Obama Administration cites the War Powers Resolution passed in 2001 as the legal authority to engage in hostilities in Syria and Iraq. Laughably, the administration recently argued for the repeal of the 2001 War Powers Resolution.
Gateway Pundit reported:
On Tuesday September 23, 2014 President Obama sent this letter to Congress explaining his legal justification to bomb terrorist targets inside of Syria. Obama cited Public Law 107-40 from 2001 as justification for the attacks.
But, just two months ago – as The Conservative Treehouse noted – Obama asked Congress to repeal the law saying “the 2002 Iraq AUMF is no longer used for any government activities”.?
One shadowy figure being associated with the Khorasan group has been on the intelligence community’s radar for quite some time.
His name is Muhsin al-Fadhli.
The “wanted poster” above shows Muhsin al-Fadhli and his deputy Adel Radi Sakr al-Wahabi al-Harbi.
Reuters reported on al-Fadhli and his deputy in October 2012 (emphasis mine):
Oct 18 (Reuters) – The United States said on Thursday it was offering millions of dollars for information leading to the location of two al Qaeda members accused of facilitating the movement of funds and operatives through Iran.
The Obama administration is offering up to $7 million for information leading to the location of Iran-based financier Muhsin al-Fadhli, who was among the few al Qaeda leaders who received advance notification of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, the State Department said.
Up to $5 million is being offered for al-Fadhli’s deputy, Adel Radi Saqr al-Wahabi al-Harbi, who is accused of working with a network that served as a pipeline for al Qaeda to move operatives and funds in South Asia and the Middle East.
The U.S. Treasury also took action against al-Harbi, imposing financial sanctions that will prohibit U.S. citizens from dealing with al-Harbi and freezing any assets he may have under U.S. jurisdiction.
According to the National Counterterrorism Center, both Muhsin al-Fadhli and Adel Radi Sakr al-Wahabi al-Harbi are two of the top most-wanted terrorists. And, according to the Saudi Ministry of the Interior (MOI) website, Adel Radi Sakr al-Wahabi al-Harbi is also on the list of 47 most-wanted terrorists in Saudi Arabia.
Now, this is where it gets interesting. Muhsin al-Fadhli has been operating out of Iran. I brought up the issue of Iran’s hand in helping to support ISIS in an earlier article.
Via Michael Ledeen:
Remember that ISIS was supported by Iran and Syria as a weapon against anti-Assad and anti-Iranian forces (from the Kurds to the FSA), none of whom is receiving serious American support.
It is exceedingly unlikely that Mr. Obama will do anything that would threaten Assad’s rule or Iran’s power.
Another al-Qaeda operative linked with al-Fadhli and operating out of Iran is financier Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil, also known as Yasin al Suri.
Mojahedin.org reported (emphasis mine):
The State Department named the men as Muhsin al-Fadhli and his deputy Adel Radi Saqr al-Wahabi al-Harbi, saying both ‘facilitate the movement of funds and operatives through Iran on behalf of the Al-Qaeda terrorist network.’
‘Al-Qaeda elements in Iran, led by Fadhli, are working to move fighters and money through Turkey to support Al-Qaeda-affiliated elements in Syria,’ the department said in a statement.
‘Fadhli also is leveraging his extensive network of Kuwaiti jihadist donors to send money to Syria via Turkey.’
Fadhli, 31, was among the few Al-Qaeda leaders who was given advance notice that the group planned to strike the United States on September 1, 2001.
He is also alleged to have raised money to fund the October 2002 attack on the French ship MV Limburg off the coast of Yemen in which one person was killed, and four crew members injured.
‘Fadhli reportedly has replaced Ezedin Abdel Aziz Khalil (better known as Yasin al-Suri) as Al-Qaeda’s senior facilitator and financier in Iran,’ the statement said, offering up to $7 million for information on his location.
Fadhli is on Saudi Arabia’s most wanted list after a series of Al-Qaeda attacks in the Gulf kingdom.
Harbi, 25, a Saudi national, was put on the Saudi list in 2011 charged with traveling to Afghanistan to join Al-Qaeda and providing Internet support to the group. The US is offering up to $5 million for his arrest.
I’m not the only one scratching their head concerning Iran’s role in Iraq and Syria, and Iran’s murky relationship with al-Qaeda.
The Long War Journal wrote:
With respect to Syria, there is an interesting twist in the State Department’s report. The al Qaeda network inside Iran, which operates as part of an agreement between al Qaeda and the Iranian regime, is sending fighters to Syria. It is not clear why Iran has allowed al Qaeda to facilitate these fighters’ travel to Syria, where al Qaeda’s Al Nusrah Front opposes the Assad regime, Iran, and Hezbollah.
“Iran remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al Qaeda (AQ) members it continued to detain, and refused to publicly identify those senior members in its custody,” the report reads. While some al Qaeda operatives are in detention, others are allowed to continue their work.
The report continues: “Iran allowed AQ facilitators Muhsin al Fadhli and Adel Radi Saqr al Wahabi al Harbi to operate a core facilitation pipeline through Iran, enabling AQ to move funds and fighters to South Asia and to Syria.”
“Al Fadhli is a veteran AQ operative who has been active for years,” State explains, and “began working with the Iran-based AQ facilitation network in 2009 and was later arrested by Iranian authorities.” Al Fadhli “was released in 2011 and assumed leadership of the Iran-based AQ facilitation network.”
Al Fadhli replaced an al Qaeda operative known as Yasin al Suri as the head of the Iran-based network. Al Suri was designated by the Treasury Department in July 2011 and the State Department issued a reward of $10 million for information leading to his capture in December 2011. [See LWJ reports, Treasury targets Iran’s ‘secret deal’ with al Qaeda and US offers $10 million reward for Iran-based al Qaeda financier.]
What adds to the bafflement for the casual observer is the fact the Obama Administration has made overtures to Iran to ally themselves against ISIS in Iraq, while, at the same, time arming Syrian “rebels” who are dominated by groups like Jahbat al-Nusra (al-Qaeda in Syria). Muhsin al-Fadhli is allegedly closely connected with Nusra Front.
What we have here, ladies and gentlemen, is senior leadership—core al-Qaeda … the Shura Council, if you will. Or, as fellow Watcher’s Council member GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD crunkishly calls them–“al Qaeda’s einsatzgruppen nom d’guerr’d ‘Khorasan Group.'” Which just might explain why the Obama Administration prefers the nom d’guerre “Khorasan Group,” as opposed to “al-Qaeda” proper, considering Obama has claimed on countless occasions al-Qaeda has been “decimated” and “destroyed” and “on the run.”
Whoever made the video below (posted August 2013) has a far better handle on the situation than the current administration. His predictions about al-Qaeda are spot on:
While researching what little is known about the Khorasan group, I decided to dig a little deeper into the symbolism behind the Khorasan flag, and the origins of the term “Khorasan.” What I discovered is rather fascinating, to say the least.
According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Khorasan is an ancient “historical region spanning northeastern Iran, northern Afghanistan, and the southern parts of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan”:
[Khorasan], also spelled Khurasan, historical region and realm comprising a vast territory now lying in northeastern Iran, southern Turkmenistan, and northern Afghanistan. The historical region extended, along the north, from the Amu Darya (Oxus River) westward to the Caspian Sea and, along the south, from the fringes of the central Iranian deserts eastward to the mountains of central Afghanistan. Arab geographers even spoke of its extending to the boundaries of Hindustan (India).
One website I stumbled upon while searching “Khorasan” contains a wealth of information concerning historical Khurasan, and is replete with numerous cited sources and references. One of the links describes the “Journey of the Ten Lost Tribes from Israel to Khurasan,” my emphasis:
After the destruction of the Holy Temple at Jerusalem (Beyt al Muqaddas), the Assyrian king Nebuchadnezzar enslaved the Children of Israel and took them to Media. From there onwards, the Tribes themselves and under the guidance of the Holy Prophet Tobit sought refuge in the mountains of Ghowr and Ghazni in Khurasan or Arachosia. Some parts of this journey are clearly recored in historical texts and others easily deduced like missing links in a chain of events.
The same site quotes Moshe Gil writing in A history of Palestine (p. 623): “People from distant Khurasan also reached Jerusalem.”
During the times of Muhammad, “the term Khurasan was used for the region comprising of modern day Afghanistan, the North Eastern parts of Iran, the Western parts of Pakistan and parts of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan,” quoting from MuslimBaniIsrael.com (emphasis mine):
Early Islamic usage often regarded everywhere east of western Persia, or what was subsequently termed ‘Irak ‘Adjami, as being included in a vast and ill-defined region of Khorasan, which might even extend to the Indus Valley and Sindh.
However, sources from the 14th to the 16th century report that Kandahar, Ghazni and Kabul in Afghanistan formed the frontier region between Khorasan and Hindustan.
- [Travels in Asia and Africa, 1325-1354, Ibn Battuta, 2004 publisher Routledge, isbn=0415344735, 9780415344739, page=416]
In pre-Islamic and early Islamic times, the term “Khurassan” frequently had a much wider denotation, covering also parts of what are now Soviet Central Asia and Afghanistan; early Islamic usage often regarded everywhere east of western Persia, sc. Djibal or what was subsequently termed ‘Irak ‘Adjami, as being included in a vast and ill-defined region of Khurasan, which might even extend to the Indus Valley and Sind.
The etymological origins of the word “Khorasan” is derived from Middle Persian “khor” (sun) + “asa”—literally, “like or akin to, but usually meaning arising from,” hence the meaning “land where the sun rises.” The word “Khavar-zamin,” meaning “the eastern land,” is the Persian equivalent for “Khorasan.”
It is noteworthy the names of ancient regions like Khorasan are starting to reemerge. There has been a fair amount of discussion as of late concerning why President Obama always refers to ISIS (or the “Islamic State) as “ISIL.”
Is this a big deal? Well, not to most Americans.
The reason I use ISIS instead of “ISIL,” or the “Islamic State,” is because my enemy doesn’t want me to use “ISIS.” Recently ISIS changed their name to “Islamic State” and demanded everybody refer to them as such. Well, my strategy: try to determine what the enemy wants, then don’t give it to them. So, I’ll stick with “ISIS.”
The acronym ISIS stands for “Islamic State in Syria and Iraq,” which more accurately describes the terrorist group, as far as I’m concerned. But ISIS is also known as ISIL, like our president is wont to call them. ISIL stands for “Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant.”
So, once again, we see the return of an ancient term, i.e. the Levant, which describes a multinational region encompassing the whole of Israel. The Levant comprises a land bridge from Egypt to Turkey, with Israel stuck smack-dab in the middle. Although the term Levant may not mean much to a number of Americans, it has profound meaning to Muslims, as does the word “Khurasan.”
The U.S. alliance with Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Qatar, United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain, not to mention Iran’s duplicity in the region, certainly illustrates some glaring conflicts of interest, to say the least. Saudi Arabia has been a major financier of Sunni jihadi groups fighting the Assad regime in Syria. Qatar has also been playing both sides of the fence as well.
If there is a common thread among all the major players in the Middle Eastern “region,” it would be their utter disdain for the nation state of Israel. And another common thread in the Middle East is the U.S.A., Russia and China, et al., are arming them all.
Furthermore, what concerns me greatly is the fact the U.S. is training people that are not thoroughly vetted, and may very well, and most often do, turn their expertise which the U.S. provided them against us. One would think that would be a no-brainer. But that’s what I get for thinking.