A New Imperative to Secure the Grid

EMP-power-grid--665x385CSP, by Frank Gaffney:

Iranian leaders have long stated that they seek a world “without America.” Prior to President Obama’s disastrous diplomacy, U.S. leaders have sought to prevent the mullahs from getting the Bomb for that reason, among others.

Last week, however, a firm called Cylance issued a frightening report about extensive Iranian cyberwarfare operations over the past two years. It suggests that Tehran may already be in a position to destroy this country – without firing a shot.

Hackers believed to be associated with the Iranian regime have been able to penetrate the control systems of America’s critical infrastructure – including those of our electric utilities. Were they to disrupt or destroy such systems, the United States would lose power for prolonged periods. And without electricity, many millions of us would die.

We must secure the grid, now.

Rep. Franks on Judge Jeanine: Iran military doctrine calls for EMP weapon

 

Gaffney on Judge Jeanine: Congress must continue to act on grid security

 

High Frontier

“A Date That Will Live In Infamy!”

By 

December 8, 2014

“Global critical infrastructure organizations need to take this threat seriously. The Iranian adversary is real and they’re coming, if not already here.” ~ Mark Weatherford, Former Deputy Under Secretary of Homeland Security

On a Monday 73 years ago, today, President Franklin D. Roosevelt began his address to a joint session of Congress with these famous words: “Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date that will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.” Congress declared war on Japan, with only one dissenting vote. Three days later, Germany and Italy declared war on the United States and we were committed to World War II, a war that may have been avoided had we been prepared.  

December 8, 2014 I

But we were unprepared, and over 85 million died—including death by associated starvation and disease around the world; and including over 400,000 of the “Greatest Generation Americans” who fought in that war. (Click here for some pertinent statistics by country.) My reflections last year on Pearl Harbor emphasized that this “Black Swan” event should not have been a complete surprise. Billy Mitchell was court-martialed for demonstrating the vulnerability of ships to attack from the air and giving us 15 years of explicit “strategic warning” of Pearl Harbor’s specific vulnerability  to air attack—which we ignored, and Roberta Wohlstetter’s in-depth 1962 analysis demonstrated our failure in responding to “tactical warning” of the actual attack.    

Today, we are again living through a period of great threats to all we hold dear—and we are not likely to have time to recover from a modern surprise attack using technology that did not exist in 1941-45. This is why it is so important to block Iran’s efforts to gain nuclear weapons that could pose an existential electromagnetic pulse (EMP) threat—and why the thus far failure to do so is so dangerous. 

Strategic Warning of an EMP Attack by Iran.

The remainder of my December 11, 2013 message discussed a possible, now looming, “Black Swan” attack by Iran that could extinguish American civilization—indeed Western Civilization, which is the declared objective of Iran’s ruling mullahs.  We listed the long-standing “strategic warning” events below:

  • The U.S. demonstrated  high altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) effects on “ancient” vacuum tube electronics nearly 1000 miles from our 1962 Starfish Prime nuclear test in the South Pacific—today’s solid state electronics are much, much more vulnerable to HEMP.
  • At considerable expense during the Cold War, the U.S. hardened its key military electronic systems to HEMP to assure the President could retaliate after a Soviet HEMP attack on the U.S. This capability was at the heart of our deterrent policy.
  • Post-Cold War discussions with Russia validated this investment—their high altitude tests were actually more extensive than ours and they included HEMP in their attack plans.
  • We continue to harden our strategic military systems but have done little or nothing to harden our civil critical infrastructure—especially the electric power grid, upon which the viability of most other critical infrastructure depends.
  • The Congressionally mandated nonpartisan EMP Commission reports warned of the devastating consequences of such an attack in 2004 and in 2008 provided previously classified information to back up these conclusions in a comprehensive report.
  • The EMP Commission identified the electric power grid vulnerabilities as being critically important, deserving remediation immediately—its Chairman testified that unless these vulnerabilities were rectified, starvation, disease and social collapse from a HEMP attack could lead to the death of most Americans within the following year.
  • Russia has shared its nuclear and ballistic missile technology with China, North Korea, Iran and, at least via the cacophony of proliferation if not directly, with others. This includes information that helps North Korea develop nuclear weapons to maximize EMP effects. For example, close collaboration between North Korea and Iran has benefited both—of course with help from Russia and China.
  • Iran has collaborated with North Korea and attended North Korean tests, which some experts believe were intended to demonstrate advanced designs that could easily be adapted for ballistic missile or satellite delivery to create HEMP effects.
  • Iran has pursued an extensive ballistic missile development program—including testing in the late 1990s that knowledgeable observers associate with an interest an HEMP attack from a seagoing vessel.
  • A ten-day maneuver exercise in the summer of 2011 launched some 14 ballistic missiles of various ranges, after which Iran’s then Defense Minister, Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, boasted: “The war games…show Iran’s great capability in designing, producing and using various kinds of missiles based on domestic knowledge. This showed that the sanctions imposed had no effect on Iran’s missile program.”

Last Year’s Tactical Warning of an EMP Attack by Iran.

These activities bridge into more recent potential “Tactical Warning” events that may signal an eminent attack. A slightly edited version of last year’s list follows:

  • The last bullet above suggested a certain irrelevance of the debate over sanctions in the broader context of the ongoing ill-advised negotiations with Iran on its nuclear weapons development programs. We just kicked the can down the road for the second time since last year—with no real prospect of any significantly helpful outcome.
  • Over a year ago, North Korea and Iran launched satellites to their south, traveling over the South Polar regions, which could easily have been directed over the U.S. in their initial orbit at an altitude to optimize HEMP effects over the entire continental U.S.
  • Over a year ago, Iranian Naval Admiral Afshin Rezayee said Iran’s Navy plans to deploy warships in the Atlantic.
  • Previously, Iranian officials had observed their ships can threaten U.S. coastal cities—particularly from the Gulf of Mexico. We are completely vulnerable to such an attack.
  • Meanwhile President Obama and his spokesmen have continued to signal a willingness for Iran to continue with a “Modest nuclear enrichment program” . . . whatever that means, it must drive the Israelis up the wall—as it should any who may ultimately be threatened by a nuclear armed Iran. Israel is the “Little Satan”—America is the “Great Satan.”

Breaking News—Urgent Tactical Warning.

Just breaking news should further heighten our concern that time for us to respond is running out.  Even as Secretary of State John Kerry prepares for another round of negotiations with little hope of any meaningful success, news this week explicitly indicates Iran is planning to employ EMP weapons against us. Last Monday, EMP Caucus Chairman Rep. Trent Franks (R-AZ), in speaking on the House floor for the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (CIPA) that passed by a voice vote, noted that

The National Intelligence University of the United States recently translated an Iranian military doctrine called “Passive Defense” which referenced the use of nuclear EMP as a weapon more than 20 times. This doctrine stresses that electrical grids are vital to national existence. It includes a formula for calculating the value of electric power plants and for prioritizing the targeting of electric grid components and other infrastructures.”

Mr. Franks made the same statement at a conference I attended last Thursday and Friday. I strongly urge that you read this important Act and the associated floor statements, including that of Rep. Yvette Clark (D-NY), the co-chair of the EMP Caucus. 

In addition, Senator Ron Johnson (R-WI) who will chair the Homeland Security Committee also spoke on Friday, and I believe he will be very supportive of CIPA and other measures to defend the nation against EMP attacks. Hopefully, the Senate will also pass the act before the end of the current session—if not I believe it will come up immediately in the new session to begin in January.

Rep. Franks’ reference to this Iranian report on Iran’s military doctrine deserves great weight, as further indicated by additional troubling Iranian threat information provided this week by Cylance, a private security firm. Its report on Iranian cyber operations referred to as Operation Cleaver is sobering, to say the least. Cylance dubbed the threatening Iranian team “Tarh Andishan,” which roughly translated means “thinkers” or “innovators.” They have displayed an evolved skillset to perform attacks of espionage, theft, and the potential destruction of control systems and networks. Tarh Andishan was observed actively targeting, attacking, and compromising more than 50 victims since at least 2012.

By “reverse hacking” the Iranian cyber-offense infrastructure and compromising their servers, Cylance obtained 80,000 files and 8 gigabytes of data, including data Iran stole from the U.S. Marine Corps. Among other things, the 85 page report included that the Iranian group is believed to work from Tehran, “although auxiliary team members were identified in other locations including the Netherlands, Canada, and the UK.” Targets include “military, oil and gas, energy and utilities, transportation, airlines, airports, hospitals, telecommunications, technology, education, aerospace, Defense Industrial Base (DIB), chemical companies, and governments.”

Surely, the U.S. electric power grid is among these targets. And given Mr. Franks’ revelation that the Iranian military strategy includes the exploitation of EMP, it is not a stretch to imagine Iranian attack strategy combines cyber-attacks with the more debilitating EMP attacks, once Iran achieves that capability. Indeed, this fits with Cylance’s bottom line after tracking the Operation Cleaver team for over two years, that

“the government of Iran, and particularly the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), is backing numerous groups and front entities to attack the world’s critical infrastructure.”

It would be absurd for U.S. planners not to consider the full spectrum of threats, including direct attacks like the 2 AM sniper attack on the Metcalf substation near San Jose in April 2013, followed by another attack last August.  Such repeated successful attacks on such an important substation do not provide confidence in the power company’s countermeasures, even after a year for their application—a highly publicized bad message to have sent to an Iran planning to attack the United States. Good news for Iran; bad news for us.  (Click here for a brief press account.)

The most devastating threat could occur once Iran mates nuclear weapons to its ballistic missiles and can launch a devastating HEMP attack with nuclear detonations a hundred or so miles above the U.S.—combined with cyber and a Metcalf-like attack operations. 

Some Key Bottom  Lines:

To recap a few associated important bottom lines from my email messages over the past year:

  • Members of the Executive and Legislative branches are collectively failing in their sworn duty “to provide for the common defense” against the EMP threat.
  • The key obstacles blocking effective U.S. countermeasures are purely political. The threat is well known—and validated by numerous competent technical reviews. The cost of hardening is minimal by any reasonable measure—the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which doesn’t have the authority and resources to rectify the situation, has estimated the annual cost to be less than that of a postage stamp per subscriber. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) is a captive of the Electric Power industry which has blocked for four years legislation to improve the electric grid’s ability to survive an EMP attack. Click here for an example of dysfunctional NERC-FERC treatment of Natural EMP. The above mentioned Metcalf failures speak volumes. And there’s more—much more—evidence of a badly broken regulatory process.
  • So . . . the electric power companies have been winning in their efforts to frustrate initiatives to harden the electric power grid against HEMP (or other manmade or natural EMP) effects.
  • Some believe that Iran would not attack the United States for fear of retaliation—these views ignore the stated willingness of the ruling Mullahs to commit suicide to achieve their stated objective of eliminating the Great Satan (America) and Little Satan (Israel) and to hasten the return of the Mahdi according to their end times prophesy. 
  • The Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (CIPA) is a step in the right direction, but . . .
  • The clock clicks on—toward a disaster that will make Pearl Harbor look like a picnic . . .

WILL THERE BE ANOTHER DATE THAT WILL LIVE IN INFAMY?????

Near Term High Frontier Plans.

As time may be running out for effective U.S. action, we will continue to inform all who will listen about the existential EMP threat and how to counter it. Our primary focus will be to help state and local authorities, particularly the National Guard, protect the citizens under their charge. Past experience shows that it is foolish to wait for the federal authorities to respond effectively.

High Frontier will continue to advocate the most cost effective BMD systems that the powers that be will permit.

And we will seek effective means to harden the electric power grid. As quickly as possible.

What can you do?

Join us in praying for our nation, and for a rebirth of the freedom sought, achieved and passed to us by those who came before us.

Help us to spread our message to the grass roots and to encourage all “powers that be” to provide for the common defense as they are sworn to do.

Begin by passing this message to your friends and suggest they visit our webpage, www.highfrontier.org for more information. Also, please encourage your sphere of influence to sign up for our weekly e-newsletter.

And support us with your tax deductible gifts to help enable our continuing efforts.

Congress Takes Important First Step Towards Securing The Grid

198224762

Center for Security Policy:

Last night, the House of Representatives approved unanimously H.R. 3410, the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (CIPA). This legislation marks a breakthrough: For the first time in four years, Congress has acted to begin to protect the nation’s most critical of critical infrastructures: the U.S. electrical grid. It now falls to the Senate and to President Obama to ensure that the House-passed bill becomes the law of the land.

CIPA’s lead sponsors were Reps. Trent Franks (R-AZ), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee and co-chairman of the Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Caucus, and Pete Sessions (R-TX), the chairman of the powerful House Rules Committee. The measure enjoyed strong bipartisan support including from the House Homeland Security Committee’s Chairman Michael McCaul (R-TX), and the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Committee’s Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies, Reps. Patrick Meehan (R-PA) and Yvette Clark (D-NY).

The CIPA legislation requires the Department of Homeland Security to:

  1. include in national planning scenarios the threat of electromagnetic pulse (EMP) which would entail the education of the owners and operators of critical infrastructure, as well as emergency planners and emergency responders at all levels of government of the threat of EMP events;
  2. engage in research and development aimed at mitigating the consequences of naturally occurring or man-caused EMP events; and
  3. produce a comprehensive plan to protect and prepare the critical infrastructure of the American homeland against EMP events.

Representative Franks observed:

The U.S. electric grid is fundamental to our continued way of life and practical steps must be taken to protect those critical elements that serve the United States from all threats.  The negative impacts on U.S. financial, agricultural, medical and other critical societal infrastructure are potentially catastrophic in a severe electromagnetic pulse (EMP) or severe space weather event.

By some estimates, nine out of ten Americans would perish if the power were to go off and remain off for a year’s time.

The Secure the Grid Coalition is committed to ensuring that does not happen. The Coalition is a group of national leaders in matters of defense, homeland security, solar weather, infrastructure protection and other experts who have joined forces for the purpose of achieving urgently the protection of power grid upon which the nation, its people, economy and the Department of Defense depend.

Under the honorary co-chairmanship of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Clinton Director of Central Intelligence R. James Woolsey, the Secure the Grid Coalition has been active in educating lawmakers and their constituents about the nature of the various threats to the nation’s bulk power distribution system, including but not limited to EMP. Among other efforts in that regard was influential testimony provided before the House Homeland Security Committee earlier this year by two members of the Coalition: Dr. Peter Vincent Pry, of the Congressional Task Force on National and Homeland Security, and Dr. Chris Beck, Vice President of the Electric Infrastructure Protection Council.

The Center for Security Policy sponsors the Secure the Grid and its President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. applauded the passage of H.R. 3410 last night, saying:

Yesterday, the House of Representatives took an important first step towards protecting America’s electrical grid – and millions of its people whose lives critically depend upon it – from attack or naturally induced destruction. That planning will hopefully make clear the necessity of taking steps to secure the grid before these things happen, rather than try to cope with the consequences afterwards.

Secure the Grid Coalition members are available for comment on the passage of the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act in the House of Representatives and about the considerable work still to be done to harden the electrical grid against all hazards. More information can be found at www.securethegrid.com.

Americans of Conscience Urge Cancellation of Jihadist Day at the National Cathedral

659836502Center For Security Policy:

(Washington, D.C.):  On the eve of the 100th anniversary of the start of one of history’s most horrific acts of genocide, a group of prominent figures in the religious, national security and human rights communities have written a letter to the leadership of Washington’s National Cathedral.  They urged the Cathedral not to allow a group of Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated organizations to utilize its house of worship on November 14th, 2014 for a prayer service that will inevitably – given the nature of the sponsors, their traditional service and the occasion – be a highly symbolic demonstration of Islamic supremacism.

The group’s letter notes:

November 14th, 2014, will be the 100th anniversary of the last sitting Caliph of the Ottoman Empire’s call for jihad against non-believers. The call for violent jihad against non-believers directly resulted in a genocide against the Armenian, Assyrian and Greek residents of Turkey. And while for most westerners the November 14th Jihad declaration is little more than a footnote in the annuls of World War I, for Islamic supremacists like those associated with Muslim Brotherhood, it is a date pregnant with meaning. To permit such a public display, and permit such groups to occupy the National Cathedral of the United States on this date represents an affront to the memories of those who were killed as a result of this genocide, and an affront to those Christians across the Middle East who are currently under threat by those who seek to emulate it.

Among the signatories of the letter, which was organized by the Center for Security Policy, were:

  • Lieutenant General William G. Boykin, Former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense
  • Dr. Ron Crew CH (COL) USAR, (Ret.), Executive Director, Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty
  • Pastor Jim Garlow, Senior Pastor, Skyline Church
  • Reverend Dan Cummins, Founder, Come Pray with Me
  • Pastor Paul Blair, Fairview Baptist Church

The group offered to meet with the leadership of the National Cathedral and to provide additional evidence regarding how the groups involved in the November 14th event have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.  The signatories called to mind that, as proven in federal court, the stated goal of the Brotherhood in America is to “destroy Western civilization from within.”

The letter also notes how the Muslim Brotherhood has “…repeatedly targeted Middle Eastern Christians,” including “bombing places of worship” as well as attacking “fellow Muslims who do not meet the Brotherhood’s strict Shariah standards.” Such atrocities and other acts of violent jihad are not things of the past; they are happening currently.

Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney observed:

The National Cathedral was recently rocked by an unusual earthquake, causing millions of dollars in damage to its exquisite structure.  The act of opening its doors to top members and front groups of the Muslim Brotherhood – an organization that epitomizes and practices the worst of Islam’s intolerant Shariah code – on a day that will always be associated with genocidal jihadism should rock the conscience of every member of the Cathedral’s community.  If this outrageous event is not cancelled, the damage that will assuredly be caused to the reputation of the institution’s leadership and, by association, the Cathedral itself will likely be far more severe and difficult to repair than any caused by the tremor.

National Cathedral Letter

CAIR calls Frank Gaffney Islamophobe, demands that corporations stop donating to the Center for Security Policy

BuOTNR2IQAAzuea

Click here to send email to show your support to donor corporations.

Florida Family Association:

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) issued the following news release which announced they are demanding that several corporations stop financially supporting the Center for Security Policy.

2

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CAIR Asks Defense Contractors to Drop Funding for Islamophobe Frank Gaffney

(WASHINGTON, D.C., 10/1/14) – The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation’s largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, today called on defense contractors Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Electric to stop funding an organization headed by notorious Islamophobe Frank Gaffney.

In an expose published today by Salon, Eli Clifton wrote:

“Frank Gaffney has emerged as one of the DC-beltway’s most outspoken critics of American Muslims, purveying conspiracy theories about the infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into the highest levels of the U.S. government and birther accusations about Barack Obama’s eligibility to serve as president. But even while drawing criticism from civil rights organizations, Gaffney. . .has continued to find sources of funding for his organization, the Center for Security Policy, managing a budget of over $3.5 million in 2013.”

A copy of the Center for Security Policy’s donor roll obtained by Salon lists six of America’s largest aerospace and defense contractors as supporters of Gaffney’s organization.

According to Salon:

“The document, which details contributions to the Center for Security Policy during the 2013 tax year, includes donations from: Boeing ($25,000); General Dynamics ($15,000); Lockheed Martin ($15,000); Northrop Grumman ($5,000); Raytheon ($20,000); and General Electric ($5,000).”

SEE: Look Who’s Backing Islamophobe Frank Gaffney (Salon)

“It is troubling that our nation’s top defense contractors would endorse an anti-Muslim hate group by offering it financial support,” saidCAIR Department to Monitor and Combat Islamophobia Director Corey Saylor.

Saylor notes that Gaffney is a key promoter of the bizarre conspiracy theory that Muslims in public service are infiltrating the government on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Gaffney has questioned “whether Mr. Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States,” claimed the Missile Defense Agency logo is part of a “worrying pattern of official U.S. submission to Islam,” claimed an aide to Hillary Clinton was a secret Muslim Brotherhood operative, and was a key witness for the plaintiffs in a controversial lawsuit seeking to block construction of a Tennessee mosque. He has also promoted the false belief that President Obama is a Muslim.

SEE: Southern Poverty Law Center’s Profile on Frank Gaffney

His staff attorney, David Yerushalmi, has advocated outlawing the practice of Islam in America and is the key promoter of anti-Islam bills in state legislatures nationwide.

CAIR details Gaffney’s and the Center for Security Policy’s role in America’s Islamophobia network in its report, “Legislating Fear: Islamophobia and its Impact in the United States.”

SEE: Legislating Fear: Islamophobia and its Impact in the United States

In letters to the named corporations, CAIR outlined Gaffney’s long history of Islamophobia and wrote in part:

“We believe this letter provides more than ample evidence that the Center for Security policy is a problematic choice for any corporation that seeks to avoid involvement in anti-Islam bias.”

Here’s some facts about what CAIR has already done to dumb down law enforcement and the public’s knowledge of Islamic terrorism and CAIR’s Jihadist history:

  • CAIR pressured the FBI in February 2012 to remove 876 pages and 392 presentations from their education resources that were offensive to Islamists.  NPR reported:  The FBI has completed a review of offensive training material and has purged 876 pages and 392 presentations, according to a briefing provided to lawmakers.
  • CAIR pressured the FBI in June 2013 to stop their Most Wanted advertising campaign which helped the FBI gain information regarding the whereabouts of dangerous terrorists.  
  • CAIR pressured Illinois Governor Pat Quinn to ban anti-terrorism training expert Sam Kharoba from instructing law enforcement officers throughout the state.
  • CAIR demanded that the Florida Department of Law enforcement (FDLE) ban anti-terrorism training expert Sam Kharoba from instructing law enforcement officers in the state.  Although the FDLE declined to adopt the policy requested by CAIR no law enforcement agency in Florida has contracted Sam Kharoba’s anti-terrorism training services following CAIR’s demands.
  • CAIR pressured Lane Community College to fire a professor for attempting to teach the truth about Islam in a course titled What is Islam.
  • CAIR pressured Brandeis University to cancel speaking engagement and human rights award planned for  Ayaan Hirsi Ali because of her criticism of Islamists.
  • CAIR pressured several networks to censor numerous programs including “Alice in Arabia,” “Executive Decision,” “24,” “The Siege,” “True Lies,” “Rules of Engagement,” “Obsession,” “The Third Jihad,” “Jihad in America,” “Tyrant,” and “The Sum of All Fears.”
  • Ghassan Elashi, founder of CAIR’s Texas chapter, in 2009 received a 65-year prison sentence for funneling over $12 million from the Islamic charity known as the Holy Land Foundation to the jihad terrorist group Hamas, which is responsible for murdering hundreds of Israeli civilians.
  • Mousa Abu Marzook, a former CAIR official, was in 1995 designated by the U.S. government in 1995 as a “terrorist and Hamas leader.” He now is a Hamas leader in Syria.
  • Randall Royer, CAIR’s former civil rights coordinator, in 2004 began serving a 20-year prison sentence for aiding al-Qaida and the Taliban against American troops in Afghanistan and recruiting for Lashkar e-Taiba, the jihadist group responsible for the 2008 Mumbai jihad massacres.
  • Bassem Khafagi, CAIR’s former community relations director, was arrested for involvement with the Islamic Assembly of North America, which was linked to al-Qaida. After pleading guilty to visa and bank fraud charges, Khafagi was deported.
  • Rabih Haddad, a former CAIR fundraiser, was deported for his work with the Global Relief Foundation (which he co-founded), a terror-financing organization.
  • CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case–so named by the Justice Department during the HLF trial.

CAIR’s agenda to dumb down law enforcement and the public can only weaken the national security of the United States of America. The one asset that America needs most for national security is adequately trained law enforcement in the area of Islamic terrorism given ISIS’s heightened threat to the homeland.  Yet, the Council on American Islamic Relations is pressuring every law enforcement agency they can to dumb down their knowledge on Islamic terrorism.

Florida Family Association has prepared an email for you to send to thank the officials at Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Electric for supporting the Center for Security Policy.

To send your email, please click the following link, enter your name and email address then click the “Send Your Message” button. You may also change the subject or message text if you wish.

Please click here to send your email to Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Electric officials.

For contact information please click here.

Twitter and Facebook.  The following Heading Description in bold blue and Floridafamily.org Article Link have been prepared for you to share the article shown below with your Twitter and/or Facebook friends.  Simply copy the bold blue heading and associated article link and paste on your Twitter and Facebook page.  Please feel free to edit the heading.

Please thank Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, Raytheon, and General Electric for supporting anti-terrorism efforts! http://floridafamily.org/full_article.php?article_no=393

Personal posts are more likely to be responded to by friends and acquaintances than posts from Florida Family Association.

The Boeing Company

http://www.boeing.com/boeing/companyoffices/aboutus/execprofiles/index.page

W. James (Jim) McNerney, Jr., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
jim.McNerney@boeing.com

Christopher M. Chadwick    Executive Vice President, The Boeing Company
President and Chief Executive Officer, Boeing Defense, Space & Security
Christopher.M.Chadwick@boeing.com

Thomas J. Downey, Senior Vice President, Communications
thomas.j.downey@boeing.com

General Dynamics

http://www.generaldynamics.com/about/executive-team/

Phebe N. Novakovic
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
PNovakovic@generaldynamics.com

Robert W. Helm
Senior Vice President – Planning and Development
RHelm@generaldynamics.com

Lucy Ryan, Media
lryan@generaldynamics.com

Lockheed Martin

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/who-we-are/leadership.html

Marillyn Hewson, CEO
Marillyn.A.Hewson@lmco.com

Gordon Johndroe, Media
gordon.johndroe@lmco.com

Northrop Grumman

http://www.northropgrumman.com/AboutUs/CompanyLeadership/Pages/CorporateLeadExecutives.aspx

Wes Bush, CEO
wes.bush@ngc.com

Darryl M. Fraser
Corporate Vice President, Communications
Darryl.fraser@ngc.com

Raytheon

http://www.raytheon.com/ourcompany/leadership/

comments-ethics@raytheon.com

Thomas A. Kennedy, Chairman, CEO
Tom.Kennedy@raytheon.com

General Electric

http://www.ge.com/about-us/leadership/corporate-executives

Jeffrey Immelt@ge, Chairman and CEO
jeffrey.immelt@ge.com

Beth Comstock
Senior Vice President, Chief Marketing Officer, GE
Beth.Comstock@ge.com

CAIR attacks the Center for Security Policy and Frank Gaffney

cair2bfundingTerror Trends Bulletin, by Christopher Holton:

Today we received more confirmation that we are locked in a war of ideas with Muslim Brotherhood organizations when CAIR launched a broadside at Frank Gaffney and the Center for Security Policy, one of the leaders in the counterjihad and counter shariah movement.

CAIR published the names of top defense contractors who donate to CSP, including Boeing, Lockheed, Northrop Grumman and others, criticizing them for supporting an “Islamophobic” organization.

In a perfect world, Boeing et al would react to this the same way they would have to the German Bund issuing a similar release in 1939.

But in today’s PC world in which hard Leftists control the Defense budget, one has to wonder what the reaction might be.

If any of these firms back off from supporting CSP they will have bowed their heads to the Ikhwan and complied with Shariah prohibitions against the Shariah definition of slander: namely saying anything to a Muslim that he does not like.

There are some things we can do about this:

1. Contact the following firms and (i) praise them for supporting the Center for Security Policy and (ii) urge them to ignore pressure from CAIR and continue to support the Center for Security Policy:

Boeing:

http://active.boeing.com/contactus.cfm?directed_to=BDS

General Dynamics:

Lucy Ryan

lryan@generaldynamics.com

Lockheed Martin:

http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/contact.html

Northrop Grumman:

https://apps.northropgrumman.com/RFIForms/Pages/CommunicationsRFI.aspx?PID=null&IsDlg=2

Raytheon:

comments-ethics@raytheon.com

General Electric:

http://defense.ge-ip.com/inforequestform

2. Contact the Center for Security Policy and let them know that you support them and will stand with them against the Muslim Brotherhood…

info@securefreedom.org

Finally, as a reminder, here is just who CAIR is, the organization that is attacking the Center for Security Policy:

CAIR in particular is a troubling organization that can only be described as a nefarious 5th Column unit.

Here are some concerns that thousands of Americans have about CAIR:

  • CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the US v. Holy Land Foundation, the largest terrorism financing prosecution in US history.
  • The Holy Land Foundation was a Texas-based charity whose officers were sentenced in May 2009 to between 15 and 65 years in prison for funneling over $12 million to Hamas. One of the sentenced officers, Ghassan Elashi, is the founder of CAIR’s Dallas chapter. Elashi’s illegal activities took place while he was affiliated with CAIR.
  • CAIR opened its first office in Washington, D.C. with the help of a $5,000 grant from the Holy Land Foundation.
  • In a formal letter to Senator Jon Kyl of Arizona dated 28 April 2009, the FBI stated that during the Holy Land Foundation trial, “evidence was introduced that demonstrated a relationship among CAIR, individual CAIR founders (including its current President Emeritus and its Executive Director) and the Palestine Committee. Evidence was also introduced that demonstrated a relationship between the Palestine Committee and HAMAS, which was designated as a terrorist organization in 1995. In light of that evidence, the FBI suspended all formal contacts between CAIR and the FBI.”
  • In March 2011, Muthanna al-Hanooti, one of CAIR’s directors, was sentenced to a year in federal prison for violating U.S. sanctions against Saddam’s Iraq.
  • In January of 2011, the CAIR California chapter published a poster promoting a conference called “Know Your Rights and Defend Our Communities.” That poster prominently featured the following slogan: “BUILD A WALL OF RESISTANCE DON’T TALK TO THE FBI.”
  • On March 22, 1994, During a panel discussion at Barry University in Florida, CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad said: “I used to support the PLO, and I used to be the President of the General Union of Palestine Students which is part of the PLO here in the United States, but after I researched the situation inside Palestine and outside, I am in support of the Hamas movement more than the PLO.”
  • On February 2, 1995, U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White named CAIR Advisory Board member and New York imam Siraj Wahhaj as one of the “unindicted persons who may be alleged as co-conspirators” in Egyptian Islamic Group leader “Blind Sheikh” Omar Abdel Rahman’s foiled plot to blow up numerous New York City monuments.
  • On April 19, 1996, in its first published report on alleged anti-Muslim discrimination, titled “The Price of Ignorance,” CAIR cited the arrest of Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman (the Blind Sheikh), the Egyptian cleric serving a life sentence for conspiracy to blow up New York landmarks in 1993, and the detention of senior Hamas leader Musa Abu Marzuq, as “incidents of bias and violence” against Muslims in the U.S.
  • On July 4, 1998, former CAIR chairman Omar M. Ahmad, told Fremont, California’s daily newspaper, The Argus, that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant, he said. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.”
  • In October 1998, CAIR demanded the removal of a Los Angeles billboard describing Osama bin Laden as “the sworn enemy.” According to CAIR, this depiction was “offensive to Muslims.”
  • In 1993, CAIR spokesperson Ibrahim Hooper told the Minneapolis Star-Tribune that “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future. … But I’m not going to do anything violent to promote that. I’m going to do it through education.”
  • In September 2003, CAIR’s former Community Affairs Director, Bassem Khafagi, pled guilty to three federal counts of bank and visa fraud and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Federal investigators said that a group Khafagi founded, the Islamic Assembly of North America, had funneled money to activities supporting terrorism and had published material advocating suicide attacks against the United States. Khafagi’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
  • In 2004, CAIR-Northern Virginia director Abdurahman Alamoudi pled guilty to terrorism-related financial and conspiracy charges in 2004, which resulted in a 23-year prison sentence.
  • In 2006, the co-founder of CAIR’s parent organization, IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine), Sami Al-Arian, was sentenced to 57 months in prison on terrorism charges for financing Palestinian Islamic Jihad, a designated terrorist organization according to the US State Department.
  • On August 12, 2006 CAIR helped to coordinate a number of demonstrations in support of Hezbollah and “resistance” groups fighting American forces in Iraq.
  • Randall Todd Royer, who served as a communications specialist and civil rights coordinator for CAIR, trained with Lashkar-I-Taiba, an al Qaeda-tied Kashmir organization that is listed on the State Department’s international terror list. He was also indicted on charges of conspiring to help al Qaeda and the Taliban battle American troops in Afghanistan. He later pled guilty to lesser firearm-related charges and was sentenced to twenty years in prison on April 9, 2004.  Royer’s illegal activities took place while he was employed by CAIR.
  • Onetime CAIR fundraiser Rabih Haddad was arrested on terrorism-related charges and was deported from the United States due to his subsequent work as Executive Director of the Global Relief Foundation, which in October 2002 was designated by the U.S. Treasury Department for financing al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. Haddad raised money for the Ann Arbor, Michigan chapter of CAIR.
  • On April 20, 2002: Nihad Awad addressed an anti-Israel rally in Washington D.C. while standing next to Hezbollah flag.
  • On October 12, 2001: Ghazi Kankan, executive director of CAIR’s New York office at the time, defended Hamas’s targeting of Israeli civilians. He told theJewish Week that, like Hamas, he considered all Israelis over the age of 18 to be “military” because “they are all reserves.”

Given the number of individuals associated with CAIR who have been convicted on terrorism-related causes, as well as the disturbing associations and statements from CAIR and its officials, the LAST people in the world who should be listening to them are defense firms.

In fact, one must wonder whether CAIR is pressuring these firms because they manufacture the weapons that stop and kill Jihadists in terrorist organizations, such as HAMAS.

Mohamed Elibiary has left the building

3728290738Center for Security Policy, by Frank Gaffney, Jr.

Mohamed Elibiary, an Islamist with extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and a record of influence operations in the service of its agenda, has announced his departure after five years on the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council. We can only hope that – at a moment when the danger posed by shariah-adherent Muslims is becoming more palpable by the day – the Department decided to stop legitimating an advisor who has publicly championed that it was, “ inevitable that ‘Caliphate’ return”, contended that the United States is “an Islamic country with an Islamically compliant constitution.”

Elibiary had always been brazen in his support for Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular, including featuring the Muslim Brotherhood “R4Bia” symbol on his twitter page, and publicly lauding Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb.

In 2011, Elibiary was also suspected of utilizing his security clearance in order to access confidential documents from the Texas Department of Public Safety, and seeking to “shop” the files to journalists in order to label then Presidential candidate Governor Rick Perry an “Islamophobe.” In May 2014, during testimony before Congress, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson admitted to Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX), that this was “problematic.”

Whatever the cause of Elibiary’s departure from a senior advisory capacity in the Obama administration, it must be welcomed because – as documented in the Center for Security Policy’s online, video-based course entitled The Muslim Brotherhood in America: The Enemy Within” (MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com) – he played a prominent role in blinding the U.S. government to the threat posed by the Brotherhood’s “civilization jihad.” This was the practical upshot of a sequence of events that began with Elibiary being given the FBI’s highest civilian award at the Bureau’s Training Academy in Quantico, Virginia in September 2011.

Shortly thereafter, Spencer Ackerman of Wired Magazine published pictures of materials in the FBI Training Academy’s Library that Elibiary and his ilk deemed “offensive” accompanied by a series of screeds about the need to stop employing such information and trainers employing it to prepare Bureau personnel to protect us against all enemies, foreign and domestic. On November 8, 2011, then-Homeland Security Advisor to the President (now CIA Director) John Brennan agreed not only to accommodate that demand but applied the purge to the U.S. military, U.S. intelligence community and Department of Homeland Security, as well.

Unfortunately, as welcome as the news is that Mohamed Elibiary may be less able in the future to run subversive influence operations from within the U.S. government, his next publicly announced mission is disconcerting. In response to a Tweeted question from investigative reporter Ryan Mauro (who conducted a highly illuminating interview with Elibiary in the fall of 2013), the former Senior Fellow at the Obama Department of Homeland Security announced that he was now going to turn his attention to “reform[ing] the conservative movement so the GOP can win in 2016.”

I had an opportunity to witness personally Mohamed Elibiary’s involvement with the conservative movement when I was invited in the Spring of 2013 to address a conservative group that meets monthly in the Park Cities neighborhood of Dallas, Texas. Undeterred by his presence, I briefed the group on the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, its goals of imposing shariah worldwide under the rule of a Caliph, and its practice of stealthy, pre-violent “civilization jihad” to advance that agenda.

I also discussed the enabling role that has been played on behalf of and with Muslim Brotherhood-tied Islamists like Abdurahman Alamoudi, Sami al-Arian, Nihad Awad and Suhail Khan in their influence operations targeting the George W. Bush in the run-up to and during his administration by a prominent conservative activist, Grover Norquist. As recounted at length in Agent of Influence: Grover Norquist and the Assault on the Right, the Brotherhood front called the Islamic Free Market Institute, founded by Norquist and Alamoudi, and Norquist’s self-styled “Center-Right” Coalition meetings in Washington and similar groups meeting in state capitals and major cities across the country have served as vehicles for facilitating the penetration and subversion of the conservative movement.

In the course of my Park Cities briefing last year, I did not mention Elibiary by name and he did not make any intervention or otherwise challenge my briefing. After the meeting ended and he left, however, I asked the organizer, “Why do you have a Muslim Brother in this meeting?” Interestingly, he did not reply by saying, “Who are you talking about?” or “What evidence do you have that anyone here is a Muslim Brother?” Instead, he simply said, “The Center-Right Coalition recommended him.”

One can only assume that if Mohamed Elibiary is going to be involved in “reforming the conservative movement,” he will be doing it with the help of Grover Norquist. And that prospect should be of concern to all of us – as are Norquist’s past dealings with such Islamists to, among many others, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, former Director of Central Intelligence R. James Woolsey, former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy, former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence Lieutenant General William G. “Jerry” Boykin and six of their colleagues in the community of influential national security practitioners who signed a cover letter accompanying the Statement of Facts that makes up the body of Agent of Influence. It should be required reading for all conservatives.

DECLARE WAR ON SHARIAH

iraq-machine-guns-held-aloft-afpBreitbart, by FRANK J. GAFFNEY, JR., Aug. 24.2014:

The National Journal called earlier this week for the United States to “declare war on ISIS.” The magazine is right to argue for a new authorization for the use of military force (AUMF), a legislative vehicle that passes these days for a congressional declaration of war. It is wrong, however, to urge that the existing AUMF, which targets al Qaeda and “associated forces,” be replaced by one that focuses just on the Islamic State (also known as the Islamic State in Iraq and the Sham/Syria, or ISIS, or the Islamic State in the Levant, or ISIL).

Nearly thirteen years after 9/11, it is past time to recognize that we are at war not with one group of “terrorists” or another. Rather, adherents to a doctrine or ideology they call shariah are at war with us. Shariah is, at its core, about power, not faith. While some small percentage (some estimates suggest ten-percent) of its dictates prescribe the religious practices, the rest of it defines comprehensively how every relationship must be ordered – between individuals, families, neighbors, business associates, all the way up to how the world is governed.

Most importantly, shariah obliges its followers to engage in jihad (or holy war). Don’t be misled by those who argue jihad means “personal struggle.” The Koran makes clear that jihad is “holy war.” And for shariah-adherent Islamists that war has two goals: the triumph of shariah worldwide and the establishment of what is, for want of a better term, a theocratic government to rule the entire planet according to that doctrine.

The jihadists may disagree among themselves about some points of theology (notably, differences that divide Sunnis and Shiites). They may be committed to the use of terrifying violence under all circumstances. Or, as in the case of the Muslim Brotherhood, they may believe it is to be used where practicable, but insist on employing not so much non-violent as pre-violent, subversive techniques where terrorism will be counterproductive.

Whatever the banner under which these shariah-adherents wage jihad – for example, the Islamic State, al Qaeda, Taliban, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah, Taliban, Boko Haram, Al Shabab, Ansar al-Shariah or Muslim Brotherhood – all these Islamists are our avowed enemies. That is not because of how we view them. That is because of their own doctrine which is endlessly reinforced in their mosques, via the Internet, through social media and other vehicles.

We can no longer kid ourselves, or otherwise avoid a harsh reality: While perhaps hundreds of millions of Muslims around the world – including it seems the majority of those in America – practice their faith without regard for shariah (they don’t want to live under it themselves and they do not seek to impose it on others), the authorities of Islam regard shariah as the true faith and consider these co-religionists to be apostates.

At the moment, fortunately, only a relatively small number are actively engaged in violent jihad. Many more, though, are doing what shariah demands of those unable or unwilling to wield the sword in holy war: underwriting those who do, through the practice of zakat (Islam’s obligatory contributions to approved charitable causes, one of which is jihad).

Unless and until we understand that shariah-adherent Muslims are inherently dangerous, we will be unable to define our enemy correctly. Unless and until we hold such Muslims accountable, we will not only restrict unduly the focus and effectiveness of our countervailing efforts.

Worse yet, we will actually encourage Muslims – whether states like Qatar and Saudi Arabia, organizations or individuals – to associate with, underwrite, or in other ways enable deadly foes of freedom.

Some will respond that an AUMF focused on shariah is a formula for a “clash of civilizations.” The truth is that enemies of civilization – namely, those who adhere to and seek to impose, whether through violence or by stealth, brutally repressive, totalitarian, misogynistic, homophobic, intolerant and anti-constitutional shariah on others – have made no secret of their determination to conquer and destroy us and the rest of the civilized world.

Only by making clear that we are determined to fight back in defense of freedom will we have a chance of protecting our civilization against these enemies. By identifying the political-military-legal ideology of shariah as the defining ideology of those with whom we are at war – much as we did in the past against Nazism, Fascism, Japanese imperialism, and communism – we have a chance of prevailing. And that chance will be greatly enhanced if we bring to bear now, as in the past, not only military but all other instruments of national power.

We will also incentivize Muslims who do not conform to this doctrine to join us in fighting those who accuse them of apostasy, a capital offense under shariah. If they do so, the likelihood of our early success improves still further.

So, by all means, let’s have a new authorization for the use of military force. Or better yet, a proper declaration of war approved by the Congress, authorizing the use of the full array of our economic, political, intelligence, strategic and military means of waging war. But for the sake of our civilization and freedoms, we must ensure that it correctly defines the object of our defensive war: those who adhere to and are trying compel us to submit to shariah.

Frank Gaffney: “Obama Administration Involved In Setting Up the PA/Hamas Unity Government”

Frank GaffneyBy Michael Beckman  at Tales From a Tribble:

Frank Gaffney, who is a national security and Middle East expert, and is the founder of the Center for Security Policy, and also a columnist and radio host of the Secure Freedom Radio show, was a very interesting and important guest on the Hugh Hewitt radio show on Wednesday afternoon.  Hugh and Frank were discussing the disturbing crisis Israel is facing from the constant Hamas rocket attacks on it’s cities.

In one of the more stunning moments of the interview, Hugh asked Frank Gaffney if it was true what a listener who has children in Israel asserted that the United States was the first country to recognize the unity government that included the Islamist terrorist group Hamas.  Frank Gaffney said it was worse than that.  He said that the Obama administration, via the special envoy for the peace process from the State Department, was actively involved in setting up the unity government that included Hamas. That was disturbing and shocking news to me that our government was working to aid a terrorist group to be a part of a government that they actually want Israel to negotiate with.

 

Read more

How Barack Obama Ends Wars

barack_michelle_salute_APBreitbart, By Frank Gaffney, Jr.:

In discussing last week his decision to eliminate essentially all U.S. forces from Afghanistan by the time his term of office ends, Mr. Obama declared:  “This is how wars end in the 21st Century – not through signing ceremonies but through decisive blows against our adversaries, transitions to elected governments, security forces who are trained to take the lead and ultimately full responsibility.”

Actually, how Barack Obama ends wars is by what amounts to surrendering to our undefeated adversaries, undermining elected governments by emboldening those determined to destroy them, and abandoning local security forces who lack the capability to prevail.

The President’s exchange this weekend of “prisoner of war” Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for five of the world’s most dangerous jihadists is a microcosm of his way of waging–and losing–wars. Consider the following features of this odious act of appeasement and its roll-out.

  •          The exchange was unbalanced:  We purchased at exceedingly high cost the freedom of an American described by his comrades as a deserter. It appears that by abandoning his sentinel’s post in the dark of night, he not only jeopardized their lives, but he set in train searches and tactical situations that cost the lives of numerous other servicemen.

Treating Bergdahl as some sort of heroic figure because of his five years in self-induced captivity is a further assault on the principles of integrity, discipline, and honor that have been central to the character and culture of the U.S. military for generations. This is not an accident. Destroying that culture happens to be a well-established feature of Team Obama’s social engineering of the armed forces.

  •         The price paid to achieve Bergdahl’s freedom was to release no fewer than five of the Taliban’s senior commanders to the custody of Qatar. Let’s take what’s wrong with this picture, piece by piece:

First, the Qatari government is on the other side in the War for the Free World. It is a bankroller of al Qaeda in Syria (and perhaps elsewhere): the enabler of the Muslim Brotherhood, the underwriter of the enemy’s propaganda arm, al Jazeera, etc. Trusting the Qataris to be helpful to us with regard to anything having to do with jihad is worse than willful blindness; it is national security malfeasance.

Second, the best case is that these guys will be out of the fight for one more year. Since the administration won’t say what restrictions will be imposed on them in the interim, however, it is a safe bet they will be doing whatever they can to contribute to their terrorist organization’s return to power as soon as possible. But even if that were not the case, in the long war the United States is abandoning, a year is nothing for those determined to defeat us.

  •          To complete this exchange, President Obama violated the law, something he has done relentlessly in the course of his presidency.  (To appreciate just how often, see Andrew C. McCarthy’s splendid new book, Faithless Execution: Building the Political Case for Obama’s Impeachment.) The fact that Eric Holder’s Justice Department gave Chuck Hagel’s Defense Department a fig-leaf for doing so by claiming extenuating circumstances–namely, concerns about Bergdahl’s deteriorating health–does not alter the reality that Obama and Company did not conform to the statute requiring a 30-day pre-notification to Congress.
  •          Adding insult to injury is the fact that Bergdahl does not seem to be ill, let alone near death’s door. National Security Advisor Susan Rice said on Sunday the he is “in good health” and he has reportedly been released from the hospital in Germany where his medical condition was assessed post-release. Of course, he may have lingering psychological problems, but then that may have been the case before he deserted. Either way, there is no justification there for the president ignoring the law.
  •         Speaking of Susan Rice, her interviews on two Sunday talk shows this weekend vividly called to mind the notorious, serial appearances she turned in on five such programs in September 2012. Now, as then, she was the dutiful–almost robotic–spinner, relentlessly sticking to her misleading, if not patently fraudulent talking points.

Two years ago, Rice engaged in what amounted to lying about the murderous attacks in Benghazi, by insisting they were the result of a video, not jihadist attacks.  This meme, we recently learned, was manufactured by a man who is now her Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes.  It was explicitly designed by him to deflect politically problematic attention in the run-up to the 2012 election from questions about the President’s claims that al Qaeda was on the path to defeat, and other national security frauds.

This weekend, Rice reprised her role as untrustworthy flack by relentless insisting we have a “sacred duty not to leave anyone behind”–a duty that neither she nor any other senior Obama administration official seemed to feel while the Benghazi attacks were underway. All the while, she deflected questions that would have illuminated the reality of the Bergdahl exchange–the exorbitant price we paid, how the exchange was conducted under false pretenses, the dire implications with respect to strengthening our enemies and the lack of real justification for violating the law.

With the Bergdahl exchange, Americans are on notice: Unless this episode proves to be a very costly one for Team Obama, the President is on a trajectory not only to lose Afghanistan, as we previously lost Iraq. He will also ignore statutory inhibitions on releasing the rest of the detainees in Guantanamo Bay and close that facility, foreclosing its use by a successor. The upshot of all this will be to establish that the way Barack Obama “ends wars in the 21st Century” is going to get a lot more of us killed.

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. formerly acted as an Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Reagan.  He is President of the Center for Security Policy (www.SecureFreedom.org), a columnist for Breitbart News Network and host of the nationally syndicated program, Secure Freedom Radio.

Guess Who’s Coming To Dinner?

670876846CSP, By Frank Gaffney, Jr.

The International Center for Religion and Diplomacy (ICRD) is a Washington-based non-profit organization that, like many working these portfolios, happens to have worrisome ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. It is, moreover, engaged in a top priority of what the Brotherhood calls “civilization jihad” – namely, interfaith dialogue. The Brothers cynically engage in such “bridge-building” in order to induce individuals and institutions of other creeds to provide them with political cover, thereby enabling subversive Islamist efforts to insinuate into this country the supremacist shariah doctrine – all in the name of religious freedom.

On May 30th, the ICRD will further display its true colors. It will have as its guests of honor at a gala fundraising dinner two preeminent stealth jihadists – Faisal Rauf and his wife, Daisy Khan. The couple gained international notoriety in 2010 when they sought to build a 15-story mosque complex in a building so close to Ground Zero that it was badly damaged in the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center.

The only surprise in all of this is the dinner’s keynote speaker: House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R-MI).

Now, I am personally fond of Rep. Rogers. In the land of the blind that is our Congress – which is almost completely bereft of lawmakers who focus on national security, let alone provide leadership in that portfolio – he is the one-eyed man, for sure. He has been willing to tell the truth about the world becoming more dangerous when few in his party, let alone the Democrats in Washington, have done so. A former Army officer and FBI special agent, he has championed a strong defense and sought to stave off the throw-the-baby-out-with-the-bathwater impulses of legislators determined to dismantle the NSA in the wake of the Snowden treachery.

So, I wrote the chairman last week laying out the ties between the ICRD and various American Muslim Brotherhood fronts and leaders. These include: one of the Brotherhood’s preeminent fonts of ideological purity, the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT); the American Muslims for Constructive Engagement (AMCE), whose stated mission is to secure “the deliberate appointment of qualified Muslims to key advisory bodies and policy-relevant positions in government in order to shape U.S. policy choices”; and, through the AMCE, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR). ICNA, ISNA and CAIR were listed as unindicted co-conspirators in the largest terrorism-financing trial in U.S. history: U.S. v. Holy Land Foundation, et.al.

Consequently, I urged Chairman Rogers in my 21 May letter to withdraw from the ICRD fundraiser: “While there is certainly no objection to qualified Americans, of any religion, serving in U.S. policy-making positions, it appears that members of the Muslim Brotherhood, a subversive terrorist organization with intimate ties to terrorism, are using the ICRD as a venue for an ongoing influence operation to manipulate U.S. policy. Your attendance at this event would risk further legitimizing this event to the detriment of U.S. national security.”

Unfortunately, this is not the first time Rep. Rogers has evidenced an inadequate appreciation of the civilization jihad the Muslim Brotherhood is waging inside the United States. (To read the Brotherhood’s secret plan for this jihad, see here.). Notably, in July 2012, he joined Senator John McCain and House Speaker John Boehner in criticizing Rep. Michele Bachmann and four other legislators. They had quite properly written five federal agencies’ inspectors general requesting investigations of the roles being played in shaping U.S. policies by individuals shown to be associated with the Muslim Brotherhood in this country (see: see Part 8 of the free, online course atwww.MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com).

This is a particularly bad time for the chairman of the House intelligence oversight committee to have a blind spot with respect to Islamist influence operations. After all, the Obama administration appears determined to admit more Muslim Brothers into this country as they are being rolled up in Egypt. That would be the practical effect of its recent decision to rewrite unilaterally and extra-constitutionally federal immigration statutes by allowing individuals to apply for refugee status if they have only engaged in “limited” material support for terrorism. Last week, a young Egyptian Brotherhood sympathizer, if not member, appears to be the first to have put this opportunity to the test.

In addition, as Adam Kredo observed at the Washington Free Beacon, the Obama State Department is continuing the embrace of Islamists begun while Hillary Clinton was in charge:

The State Department’s Counter Terrorism (CT) Bureau promoted on Friday a controversial Muslim scholar whose organization has reportedly backed Hamas and endorsed a fatwa authorizing the murder of U.S. soldiers in Iraq.

The CT bureau on Friday tweeted out a link to the official website of Sheikh Abdallah Bin Bayyah, the vice president of the International Union of Muslim Scholars (IUMS), a controversial organization founded by a Muslim Brotherhood leader “who has called for the death of Jews and Americans and himself is banned from visiting the U.S.,” according to Fox News.

Mike Rogers is right that the world is becoming more dangerous thanks to the rising capabilities and malevolence of global jihadists. The reality, however, is that the threat is growing in no small part because of the success jihadists are having in undermining our situational awareness and subverting our policies. We need Chairman Rogers for the remainder of his tenure in Congress to be part of the solution to that problem, not compounding it with his own case of willful blindness.

Frank Gaffney to Rep. Mike Rogers: Withdraw Your Appearance Before MB-tied Group

445582704

Imam Rauf and Daisy Khan are being honored by the International Center for Religion & Diplomacy for their pioneering efforts in promoting peace, understanding and cooperation among people of all faiths, particularly between Islam and the West. In 2010, Imam Rauf proposed to build an Islamic Community Center in downtown Manhattan, which created an intense national conversation about Islam in America.

Center releases letter from President Frank Gaffney to Rep. Mike Rogers urging him to withdraw appearance before Muslim Brotherhood-tied group

(Washington, D.C.): Today, the Center for Security Policy released a letter previously sent from CSP President Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., to Rep. Mike Rogers (Michigan, 8th), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, urging the Chairman to withdraw from his scheduled upcoming appearance as keynote speaker at the International Center for Religion and Diplomacy’s (ICRD) Faith-in-Action Award Dinner on May 30th, 2014.

In the letter, Mr. Gaffney details the ICRD’s extensive and troubling ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist entities, including:

  • The ICRD Vice President for Preventative Engagement AbuBaker Al-Shingieti’s previous service as a spokesperson for the Sudanese regime of indicted war criminal Omar Bashir – a particularly worrisome link in light of the Sudanese government’s recent sentencing of a young pregnant woman to death for refusing to recant her Christian faith and for her marriage to her Christian husband, a U.S. citizen;
  • Al-Shingieti’s previous service as regional director for the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), an organization subject to a federal grand jury probe for terrorism finance due to its ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad;
  • The ICRD’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), signed by ICRD President Douglas Johnston and IIIT President Jamal Barzinji – the latter of which, according to testimony by a federal law enforcement officer, has been connected to Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad organizing and fundraising efforts in the U.S.;
  • Al-Shingieti’s current service as President of the American Muslims for Constructive Engagement (AMCE), an organization whose Directors, Steering Committee, and Advisory Council includes leaders of multiple organizations named in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism-financing case as unindicted co-conspirators and members or affiliates of the North American Muslim Brotherhood.

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., President of the Center for Security Policy, commented:

“I commend Chairman Rogers for his years of service to our country, both in and out of Congress. His record of steadfastness on numerous issues of national security makes it especially regrettable, however, that he has chosen to go forward with his speaking engagement at the ICRD, an organization with troubling ties to both Omar Bashir’s Sudanese regime and the Muslim Brotherhood. It is my hope that Chairman Rogers will reconsider his decision to keynote the ICRD’s event, and decline therefore to give the ICRD any appearance of legitimacy in light of its past and present activities.”

A copy of the letter, along with accompanying fact-sheet can be found here:http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Frank-Gaffney-Letter-to-Chairman-Rogers.pdf

Unsafe Places: Islamist Mosques

mosque-American-flag-ReutersBreitbart, by FRANK J. GAFFNEY, JR.

The contempt that America’s enemies have for the United States these days is palpable. The most obvious current example is Vladimir Putin’s disdain for President Obama, whom he regards as little more than a speed-bump on the road to his conquest of Ukraine and perhaps other nations in what the Kremlin calls Russia’s “near-abroad.”

Not content with snatching Crimea and preparing reprises elsewhere, Putin has a jet buzz one of our ships in the Black Sea for ninety minutes then launches a new multiple-warhead intercontinental ballistic missile. By contrast, Team Obama is busily dismantling what’s left of our navy and strategic forces.

Then there’s the back of the hand treatment China showed Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel when, during his recent visit to the People’s Republic, the Pentagon chief had the temerity to lecture his hosts about how to behave internationally. They took him to see their just-refurbished aircraft carrier and unveiled a new fighter aircraft to operate from it. The best Hagel could do was announce that the U.S. was going to respond to Beijing’s increasing belligerence in the region by sending there a grand total of two more anti-missile destroyers–by 2017.

A more subtle, but no less in-your-face kind of contempt has just been served up by Muslim Brotherhood operatives and other Islamists in this country.

To mark the occasion of the first anniversary of two of their fellow jihadists’ murderous attack at the Boston Marathon, the leaders of several Brotherhood fronts have launched something called the “Safe Spaces Initiative.” They evidently think we are so stupid, or at least now so submissive, that they can try to put mosques off-limits to law enforcement. This is all the more astounding since we know that the perpetrators of the terrorism of a year ago used the Islamic Society of Boston mosque in Cambridge to become versed in the ways of the supremacist Islamist doctrine known as shariah and the jihad it commands.

A chief proponent of this Safe Spaces gambit is Salam al-Marayati, the president of an Islamist influence operation out of California with extensive access to the Obama administration, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC). In an opinion piece posted by altmuslim blog on March 28, al-Marayati actually makes plain the true purpose of his Safe Spaces Initiative.

Notwithstanding the portrayal of this proposal as a means of preventing radicalization in mosques, in the words of al-Marayati: “Safe spaces are needed so that government informants and extremist recruiters are prevented from violating the sanctity of the mosque. In essence, we want to enhance both a spiritual safety and public safety.” (Emphasis added.)

Unfortunately, the latest announcement by William Bratton–the former police commissioner recently re-appointed by New York’s new, Islamist-friendly mayor, Bill de Blasio–would sure seem to justify the Brothers’ low regard for us. As the New York Timesreported today “The New York Police Department has abandoned a secretive program that dispatched plainclothes detectives into Muslim neighborhoods….Plainclothes detectives looked for ‘hot spots’ of radicalization that might give the police an early warning about terrorist plots.”

The Times quoted the NYPD’s chief spokesman, Stephen Davis, who made clear the completeness of the department’s submission to the Islamists who style themselves as the “leaders” and “representatives” of all Muslim Americans: “‘Understanding certain local demographics can be a useful factor when assessing the threat information that comes into New York City virtually on a daily basis,” Mr. Davis said. “In the future, we will gather that information, if necessary, through direct contact between the police precincts and the representatives of the communities they serve.”

I discussed the folly of making mosques surveillance-free zones in an interview on Secure Freedom Radio this evening with former federal prosecutor and best-selling author Andrew C. McCarthy. Here’s part of our conversation (for the entire podcast, click here):

FRANK GAFFNEY: The Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan, who’s a Muslim Brother fellow-traveller jihadist type, has a rather poetic turn of phrase for it. He says, “The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks, and the faithful our army.” And, Andy, this gives rise to a concern that I’m sure you share about an initiative that some of these Muslim Brotherhood types, notably Mohamed Magid, the president of the largest Muslim Brotherhood front in the United States, the Islamic Society of North America–and, oh, by the way, a frequent visitor at the Obama White House and prominent source of counsel to him and others in his Administration–

ANDY MCCARTHY: And another unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation.

FG: Indeed. These guys have cooked up something called the “Safe Spaces Initiative.” I wonder what you make of that idea, particularly as it seems their purpose is to, as one of them put it, “keep government informants…from violating the sanctity of the mosque.”

AM: Yeah, well, you know, it’s unfortunate that with this particular Justice Department and this Administration they’re probably pushing on an open door.

FG: It’s probably a wired game, let’s be honest. These guys have almost certainly got this rigged with the Justice Department.

AM: But the amazing thing is for all of Obama and Eric Holder’s caterwauling about, you know, how we’ve proved again and again that the civilian justice system is the best way to prosecute terrorism cases–well, why don’t they ever check into what was proved in those prosecutions that they like to tout around? Because if they open the transcripts…what they would find is that mosques were used as recruitment centers, they were used for conspiratorial conversations and agreements, they were used to house weapons, they were used to transfer weapons, and they really were used to light a fire under people who might have been fence-sitters but who were powerfully influenced by some of the imams, particularly the guy who I prosecuted in the 1990s, the Blind Sheikh.

It was in the mosques that [Omar Abdel-Rahman] did most of the damage that he did to the United States. So this is not something we speculate about, Frank. This is something that’s actually been proved in court, and proved again and again and again. So, if you’re going to say that a mosque needs to be a safe space, then what you’re really saying is we’ve taken willful blindness, which was a problem, and we’ve now codified it, so it’s not just willful blindness; it’s just mulish, absolute refusal to come to terms with what we’re up against.

FG: Yeah. And to speak to the other subject of your trilogy there, it is a formula for more of the grand jihad, not less. It is a certainty that you will find more Tsarnaev boys being recruited, or being trained, or being armed, or in other ways being enabled. It simply is mindboggling, Andy, and I think the American people couldn’t comprehend what’s going on here, or believe it if told it.

We can’t afford more of the sort of willful blindness that will give rise to more unsafe mosques and other places, and more jihad.

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr. formerly acted as an Assistant Secretary of Defense under President Reagan.  He is President of the Center for Security Policy (www.SecureFreedom.org), a columnist for Breitbart News Network and host of the nationally syndicated program, Secure Freedom Radio. 

Deadly Life-Support for a Threatening Iran

emCenter for Security Policy, By Frank Gaffney:

In his State of the Union address last month, President Obama committed national security fraud.  He claimed to have “halted the progress of Iran’s nuclear program and rolled parts of that program back.” Unfortunately, it is becoming ever more apparent that the only thing he’s actually “rolled back” is the sanctions regime meant to halt that program.

For example, the Washington Free Beacon reported Monday that Iranian oil exports have increased by roughly one-quarter in the last month alone. China, Japan, South Korea and India are set to provide what amounts to life-support for the mullahs’ regime by buying vast quantities of the once-off-limits product.  The Indians say they would like to purchase oil “exclusively from Tehran through 2015.”

According to the Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo, “exports of Iranian crude oil jumped to 1.32 million barrels, up from December’s high of 1.06 million barrels, according to data from the International Energy Agency…. The increase runs counter to a promise by the Obama administration that ‘Iran’s oil exports will remain steady at their current level of around 1 million barrels per day.’”

This statistic provides fresh evidence that the Obama administration perpetrated another fraud by declaring that the value to Iran of the deal’s sanctions relief would amount to no more than $7 billion.  In fact, it appears that, thanks to increased oil sales, the mullahs will actually receive cash infusions of over $20 billion.

Since there are no restrictions on the use of even the $4.2 billion in frozen Iranian funds we are obliged under the deal to give back to Tehran – including on March 1st $450 million and a further $550 million on March 7th – and since money is, after all, fungible, it is likely that these windfalls will wind up financing activities that endanger us.

For one thing, Tehran is making plain that its nuclear program is not halted.  Notably, Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif declared last month, “The White House tries to portray [the deal] as basically a dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program. That is the word they use time and again. If you find a single, a single word, that even closely resembles dismantling or could be defined as dismantling in the entire text, then I would take back my comment. We are not dismantling any centrifuges, we’re not dismantling any equipment, we’re simply not producing, not enriching over 5%.”

According to another senior Iranian negotiator, Abbas Aaraghchi, it would “take less than a day” to return to enriching uranium to the 20% level.  In other words, the undoing of the sanctions regime – which is, as a practical matter, effectively irreversible – has been bought in exchange for what amount to gestures by the mullahs that can be immediately negated at will.

It is bad enough that Team Obama was completely snookered on the nuclear program.  But Iran is deliberately adding insult to injury by its simultaneous and increasingly threatening behavior on other fronts.

Notably, Iranian ballistic missile capabilities continue to grow.  Last week, Tehran tested two indigenously produced long-range Bina missiles. U.S. intelligence is said to believe Iran can have a missile capable of reaching the United States within two years. And, thanks to its extensive collaboration with North Korea on nuclear and missile developments – including so-called “space-launch” vehicles, we may face such a threat even sooner.

Meanwhile, Iran’s mullahocracy is ramping up the ominous presence and activities of its operatives in our hemisphere. Iranian agents conduct espionage, influence operations and collaboration with enemies of this country – from the region’s dictators to narco-traffickers – under diplomatic cover, the banner of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and that of Hezbollah. No good can come of an emboldened adversary acting with impunity in what should rightly be thought of as our front yard.

The latest addition to this combustible mix is Iran’s announcement that it will begin deploying warships off America’s coasts.  It would be a mistake to discount this development as a symbolic act of no strategic import.  At a time when U.S. naval resources are declining, the task of monitoring and, if necessary, countering such hostile warships may not receive the priority it deserves.

Alternatively, the presence of Iranian naval combatants may distract such attention as the Navy can provide from another threat: tramp steamers equipped to perform the sort of “Scud-in-a-tub” attack of which the blue-ribbon congressional Electromagnetic Pulse Threat Commission warned years ago. Iran has put in place nearly all the required elements of such a strike – specifically, missiles capable of being launched from sea-going platforms, tested to deliver a device to apogee where a nuclear detonation would trigger a burst of electromagnetic energy that could have devastating effects on our electric grid and country.  The one missing ingredient would appear to be a serviceable nuclear weapon. And, thanks to Team Obama, that may also be in the mullahs’ hands in short order.

America is being put at risk by Barack Obama’s serial national security fraud. Will he be held accountable for it, and corrective actions taken, before we are afflicted by the predictable consequences?

 

New publicity of attack on California transmission substation re-energizes efforts to protect the grid

download (70)

Sign the Petition to Protect the Grid!

For background see Jerry Gordon’s article at NER:

The Metcalf Incident: California Power Station Terrorist Attack Reveals Highly Vulnerable National Grid

 

Jeanine Pirro is helping to get the message out:

 

 

 

And Center for Security Policy’s Frank Gaffney together with EMPact America and the Reserve Officers Association hosted a live webcast on Feb. 6

American Security and The Iranian Bomb: Analyzing Threats at Home and Abroad

 

Ted Cruz: Nuclear Iran greatest national security threat to US:

 

Woolsey: EMP catastrophe worse than effects of nuclear war:

 

The full video of the event can be viewed here

Now Bob Gates Tells Us

3667505510Center For Security Policy, By Frank Gaffney:

For most of the past five years, President Obama’s “fundamental transformation” of American national security policy, practice and capabilities has largely gotten a pass from the public, the press and even his political opponents. Indeed, his reelection in 2012 was made possible in no small measure by Team Obama’s substantially uncontested claims that his leadership had put al Qaeda “on the path to defeat,” “ended the war in Iraq” and successfully set the course for doing the same in Afghanistan.

Two developments last week may mark the beginning of a far more realistic view of the Obama record – and the opportunity, at last, for the sort of corrective actions that are long overdue.  Afghanistan features prominently in both.

First, selected pre-publication leaks of a new memoir by Mr. Obama’s first Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates, offered authoritative insights into the politicized nature of the administration’s decision-making on Afghanistan and other security issues. The Commander-in-Chief is shown to profoundly distrust the military. He and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acknowledge playing politics with U.S. policy on Iraq. And Vice President Biden and the recently departed National Security Advisor Tom Donilon are shown to be seriously lacking in judgment, at best, and utterly incompetent at worst.  Of Biden, Gates correctly points out that he has been “wrong about every major foreign policy issue for forty years.”

Gates’ book, Duty: Memoirs of a Secretary at War, rocketed to the best-seller lists as pundits and politicians parsed its criticisms of his former boss and colleagues. Particularly noteworthy are his accounts of the fury he claims to have felt at White House officials’ “aggressive, suspicious and sometimes condescending and insulting questioning of our military leaders.” Team Obama’s micromanagement led to “breaches of faith” with the armed forces that have, in turn, contributed to the unraveling of our position in Afghanistan at the hands of a President who lost confidence in the mission and undermined those responsible for carrying it out.

Such behavior at the highest levels of the U.S. government is even more appalling in light of the second major Afghan-related event of the week: the release of “Lone Survivor,” a powerful account of the courage, skill and valor of American warriors in the crucible of a 2005 special operations mission gone bad.  What makes this film so impactful is not merely its vivid portrayal of the ruthless and relentless Islamist foes we face in that theater (and elsewhere), but its recounting of the decency and morality of the forces we ask to defend us against them.  Those qualities cost all but one of the SEAL reconnaissance team and many others who tried to rescue them to be killed in action.

As it happens, the Gates book and new movie appear just as the consequences of President Obama’s preposterous claim to have unilaterally ended the war in Iraq become palpable.  Cities and regions of that country that were secured from jihadists at enormous cost in the lives of American servicemen and national treasure have, in our absence, once again fallen to the enemy.

Worse yet, the same outcome is now in prospect with respect to Afghanistan.  With strong support from Joe Biden, Mr. Obama is planning to withdraw all U.S. combat forces from that country by year’s end.  It remains to be seen whether the Afghans agree to allow some vestigial presence thereafter. But the die is cast:  A lack of presidential confidence in and support for the mission of preventing the Taliban, al Qaeda and other jihadists from once again enjoying safe haven in that country will ensure that those like the fallen in Lone Survivor’s ill-fated Operation Red Wings will have died in vain.

It didn’t have to be this way.  Had President Obama not serially communicated weakness and irresolution, hollowed out the U.S. military, undermined it further with social engineering on matters ranging from gays in the military to women in combat and embraced some of the most dangerous of our Islamist enemies – including the Muslim Brotherhood, Iran and even representatives of the Taliban, America’s security interests might not be in free-fall around the world today.

There is, therefore, no small irony in the current rap on Bob Gates’ book – from some Republican savants as well as the predictable Democratic partisans – namely, that he shouldn’t have published it until after the end of the Obama presidency in 2017.

To the contrary, it would have been far better if Mr. Gates had exposed his insights into what was happening to the common defense far earlier.

Indeed, one wonders:  If Bob Gates had resigned over the practices and conduct we are now told infuriated him, instead of staying in office and accommodating them, might his warnings have prevented, or at least substantially reduced, the wrecking operation that is currently devastating our all-volunteer force and putting our country and the rest of what’s left of the Free World in ever-greater jeopardy?