Muslim Immigration Poses Serious National Security Threat

This is Part 5 of a series called Know Thy Enemy: A Crash Course In Radical Islam

In this series, IBD breaks the political taboo linking Islamic violence with the religion of Islam by studying Muslim attitudes and beliefs.

It also examines the Obama administration’s refusal to identify Islamic terrorists as Islamic, which has led to a misdiagnosis of the factors driving terrorism and an unrealistic assessment of our enemy.

Because the administration has failed to understand the militant theology motivating the enemy, it has failed to develop a coherent strategy to defeat it. Worse, immigration and security policies are mismatched with the threat and actually aid the enemy. This exclusive series hopes to better inform the public about the source of growing world violence.

Know Thy Enemy: A Crash Course In Radical Islam

Investors Business Daily, BY PAUL SPERRY, Feb. 19, 2015:

France, Belgium and now even liberal Denmark regret letting in so many immigrants from Muslim countries. Their swelling Islamic communities have become breeding grounds for terrorists. So why is the U.S. opening the floodgates to foreign Muslims?

The threat Muslim immigrants pose to homeland security was not addressed during the White House’s three-day summit on terrorism.

Instead, Vice President Joe Biden assured Muslim groups gathered during one session that the “wave” of Muslim immigration is “not going to stop.”

Wave? More like a tsunami.

Between 2010 and 2013, the Obama administration imported almost 300,000 new immigrants from Muslim nations — more immigrants than the U.S. let in from Central America and Mexico combined over that period.

This is a sea change in immigration flows, and it threatens national security.

Many of the recent Muslim immigrants are from terrorist hot spots like Iraq, where the Islamic State operates. From 2010-2013, Obama ushered in 41,094 Iraqi nationals from there.

Now the State Department says it will quadruple the number of refugees brought here from Syria, where IS is headquartered.

The U.S. will admit as many as 2,000 Syrian nationals by the end of fiscal year 2015, up from 525 since fiscal 2011.

Yes, the number of displaced people inside war-torn Syria and Iraq, an estimated 3 million refugees, rivals the most in Mideast history. But rolling out the welcome mat for them in the middle of a mushrooming war on Muslim terrorism is dangerously shortsighted.

Top U.S. counterterror officials say terrorists could easily slip into the country from Iraq and Syria, in spite of promised screening procedures for such refugees.

“It’s clearly a population of concern,” National Counterterrorism Center Director Nicholas Rasmussen testified this week.

House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mike McCaul called the new policy “a federally sanctioned welcome party to potential terrorists.”

That’s no stretch. If just a fraction of the 300,000 new Muslim immigrants already here follow in the footsteps of the Franco-Algerian brothers who recently terrorized Paris, we could be facing chronic terror in our cities.

The main homeland threat from groups like IS comes through our immigration system. If they also use our loose policies as a vehicle for jihad and Islamization, we will face the same crisis as Eurabia.

The British press is reporting that IS has threatened to release a huge wave of migrants from Libya across the Mediterranean disguised as refugees to cause chaos in Europe.

Who’s to say they aren’t setting a similar immigration bomb for America?

Authorities can’t even get a handle on homegrown IS jihadists who are already in America. Why would we risk adding so many potential jihadists from abroad to the already overloaded terrorist threat matrix?

The FBI director says he’s got open cases against IS suspects in every state but Alaska. More than 100 American Muslims have hooked up with the vicious terror group in Syria or Iraq, and at least a dozen fighters already have returned to America and may be forming sleeper cells to attack the homeland.

These suspects are hard for agents, who already are overstretched, to monitor. They’ve discarded their Islamic beards and garb and have blended into society. Analysts suspect some may have even infiltrated the military and government.

While America ushers in Islamic immigrants, Europe is pulling up the welcome mat. In recent months, both France and Britain have proposed imposing curbs on immigration out of fear of importing more terrorists. The bills will likely pass in the wake of the Paris massacre.

Thanks to mass immigration from North Africa, France’s Muslim population has swelled to 6.5 million, or 10% of its population. More than 1,000 French Muslims have joined IS. A recent poll found that 27% of French Muslims ages 18-24 support the Islamic State.

Growing pockets of radicalism are spreading in towns throughout France. There are “no-go” zones for non-Muslims and even local authorities, not just in Paris but all over the country.

Authorities say that they’ve lost control of the situation. Muslim attacks on police and synagogues are now regular events.

Similar problems are cropping up in Germany. After an influx of Syrian and other Muslim immigrants, a recent poll found that 40% of Germans say they don’t feel at home in their own country thanks to “Islamization.”

America will no doubt suffer the same nightmares if its Muslim population is allowed to reach a critical mass.

At current immigration rates, and barring a much-needed moratorium, our Muslim population will more than double over the next 15 years, hitting about 6.2 million in 2030, according to a recent Pew Research Center study — “in large part because of immigration and higher-than-average fertility among Muslims.”

Fifteen years from now, Pew found, America will “have a larger number of Muslims than any European country” except for France and Russia.

If you think this huge influx of foreign Muslims will assimilate and adopt Western values, you haven’t been to Alexandria, Va., or Dearborn, Mich., or Minneapolis recently.

They resemble little Cairos, with their Arabic store signage, halal butchers, hookah bars and even blaring calls to prayer from mosque minarets. Such cultural diversity might be quaint if not for the fact these heavily Muslim immigrant enclaves are also breeding grounds for terrorism. More people from Dearborn are on the federal terrorist watch list than from any other American city except New York.

Recent terrorist attacks in Paris, Brussels and Copenhagen by Muslims operating with support from those cities’ swelling Muslim immigrant communities are an ugly reminder that Muslim immigration doesn’t bring the kind of diversity once cherished in the West. It leads to violence and Islamization.

All this raises serious national security concerns. But the White House is too busy defending Islam and portraying the Muslim community as victims of “discrimination” to consider them.

Sperry, formerly IBD Washington bureau chief, is author of “Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington.”

***

Published on Feb 20, 2015 by EnGlobal News World

Rep. Mike McCaul on radical Islam spreading to American soil. Congressman concerned about possible influx of Syrian refugees

****

Melanie Nezer: We want the US to admit 75,000 Syrians over 5 years!

Melanie Nezer: We want the US to admit 75,000 Syrians over 5 years!

Media shock over Obama plan to bring in a couple of thousand Syrian refugees growing (refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com)

By Ann Corcoran:

This is just a quick commentary.

My alerts are filled with news stories about revelations last week and the week before that the Obama Administration is planning on bringing Syrian Muslim refugees to the US this year and in future years and everyone is shocked at the number being discussed—2,000.

Don’t get me wrong, I am glad the media is now paying attention.

But, remember, up until December of last year the State Department was predicting that they would bring in 9,000-10,000 this year. (See our Syrian refugees archive by clicking here)

Remember also that it is the refugee resettlement contractors***and the UN lobbying us to bring in 15,000 a year!  See one of many stories on the subject here as the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Societyleads the charge.  Not to appear to be picking on HIAS—the US Conference of Catholic Bishops and the Lutherans testified in Congress last yearthat they wanted the US to take 12,000-15,000 Syrians a year starting last year!

And, finally, why isn’t the same media paying attention to the fact that we brought in 20,000 Iraqis (three quarters are Muslim Iraqis) last year alone and 9,000 Somalis last year alone?

Come on media!  Where have you been?

***Update*** Here is one more of many stories on the media figuring out that the Syrians are coming!

***The federal refugee resettlement contractors:

And for some perspective on where all this is leading:

How many Muslims living in the US could justify “violence against civilians” in defense of Islam? (refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com)

By Ann Corcoran:

This past week as the theme coming out of Washington was—hug a Muslim—there were many press accounts saying that the US was somehow different from Europe in that our Muslims are more “integrated” into society than those young violent ones in Europe.  Ours also have more stuff according to Obama.

In our view, the only difference is that in Europe there are more of them! 

When we have a higher percentage here in the US, the Muslim population will be emboldened and along with higher numbers will come more demands from the Muslim ‘community’ for America to accept precepts of shariah law.

The numbers!

One important statistic being misused by the mainstream media and highlighted in an article from the Associated Press by Josh Lederman is drawn from this 2011 Pew report.

First, before we get to the news, put these numbers in your head:  By 2011, Pew Research estimates that the US population of Muslims stands at 2.75 million.  Pew’s numbers are now nearly 4 years old so I believe the population is higher.  It must be! because Pew says 100,000 legal immigrant Muslims enter the US each year.

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) puts the number at 6-7 million (also a few years old).

From the Associated Press at Eyewitness News 3:

Ample evidence suggests that Muslims in America do feel more integrated into society than those living in Europe. Often marginalized and relegated to poorer neighborhoods in European cities, many Muslim immigrants to the U.S. have flourished as doctors and scientists and in other white-collar professions. Middle-class, predominantly Muslim or Arab-American enclaves have cropped up in places such as Dearborn, Michigan, and Minneapolis, allowing immigrants to carve out their own stories.  [So sick of this story c***!—we have stories too!—ed]

“That’s the story extremists and terrorists don’t want the world to know: Muslims succeeding and thriving in America,” Obama said during separate remarks at the summit Wednesday.

Now this is how Obama and the media use numbers in deceptive ways. AP continues with its editorial piece disguised as news:

There’s also reason to believe that sense of successful assimilation has offered a degree of protection against the allure of extremism. In 2011, a Pew Research Center survey of American Muslims found that just 2 in 10 Muslims in the U.S. thought there was a great deal or a fair amount of support for extremism among Muslim Americans. Roughly 80 percent said suicide bombings and other violence against civilians was never justified to defend Islam from its enemies, compared to just 8 percent who said it was sometimes or often justified. [Doesn’t sound bad, right?—ed]

By the way there is another 5% who say “rarely” justified.  (See the full report, here)

O.K. now look at it this way!

If 8% of the US Muslim population believes that VIOLENCE AGAINST CIVILIANS IS JUSTIFIED (often or sometimes) TO DEFEND ISLAM, then:

Using a low of 2 million Muslims in America and a high of 7 million, that means that 160,000 Muslims in the US could justify violence against civilians to defend Islam at the low end, to 560,000 at the high end!

Sounds like a ticking time bomb to me!

O Beautiful, For Specious Guys

by Mark Steyn
Steyn on America
February 20, 2015

1178The US media have had a fit of the vapors over Rudy Giuliani’s suggestion that Barack Obama does not love America. As the Instapundit says, their reaction suggests that Giuliani hit a nerve.

For my own part, I am way beyond that. By the way, I’m growing rather weary of the cheap comparisons of Obama with Neville Chamberlain. The British Prime Minister got the biggest issue of the day wrong. But no one ever doubted that he loved his country. That’s why, after his eviction from Downing Street, Churchill kept him on in his ministry as Lord President of the Council, and indeed made Chamberlain part of the five-man war cabinet and had him chair it during his frequent absences. When he died of cancer in October 1940, Churchill wept over his coffin.

So please don’t insult Neville Chamberlain by comparing him to Obama. I’m not a conspiracy theorist, because conspiracies are generally a comforting illusion: the real problem with Obama is that the citizens of the global superpower twice elected him to office. Yet one way to look at the current “leader of the free world” is this: If he were working for the other side, what exactly would he be doing differently?

For example, he has spent most of this week hosting an international conference on something called “violent extremism”. Whatever may be said of Munich, Chamberlain never hosted a three-day summit on “rearmament” in general whose entire purpose was to deny that “rearmament” and “Germany” were in any way connected. Yet that is exactly the message the United States government has just offered to the world – in between such eccentric side spectacles as Marie Harf, star of the hilarious new comedy Geopolitically Blonde, explaining her jobs-for-jihadis program, and the new hombre in charge of the planet’s mightiest military machine having his woman felt up on camera by Joe Biden. Now there’s a message to send to the misogynists of Burqastan about what happens when you let the missuses out of their body bags.

Here’s John Kerry in The Wall Street Journal:

The rise of violent extremism represents the pre-eminent challenge of the young 21st century…

A safer and more prosperous future requires us to recognize that violent extremism can’t be justified by resorting to religion…

Violent extremism has claimed lives in every corner of the globe, and Muslim lives most of all…

This summit at the White House and State Department will expand the global conversation and, more important, adopt an action agenda that identifies, shares and utilizes best practices in preventing and countering violent extremism

Put simply, we are building a global partnership against violent extremism.

Success requires showing the world the power of peaceful communities instead of extremist violence.

Wait a minute, “extremist violence”? How come the spell-check didn’t catch that? Don’t worry. The very next sentence is back on track:

Success requires offering a vision that is positive and proactive: a world with more concrete alternatives to the nihilistic worldview of violent extremists

We have to devote ourselves not just to combating violent extremism, but to preventing it…

We’ve combated violent extremism before…

The 20th century was defined by the struggle to overcome depression, slavery, fascism and totalitarianism. Now it’s our turn. The rise of violent extremism challenges every one of us…

By now you may be saying, “Oh, ‘violent extremism’, I get it. You mean…” Whoa, don’t go there, girlfriend. “This is not true Islam,” insists President Obama.

Roger Kimball observes:

“ISIL is not ‘Islamic.'” Really? Was the Ayatollah Khomeini “Islamic?” How about Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Erdogan: is he “Islamic”? A few years ago, Erdogan told the world that the phrase “moderate Islam” is “ugly”because “Islam is Islam.” Democracy, he said, is just an express stop on the train whose destination is Islam…

The Saudis, the biggest and richest Sunni nation? They torture bloggers for “insulting Islam,” stone adulteresses, maim thieves, and treat women like chattel. Do they represent Islam?

But Obama has ambitions way beyond the Turks and Saudis. If the Islamic State isn’t “true Islam”, is the Taliban, our “partners for peace” in Aghanistan? Is “true Islam” the Iranian mullahs, our “partners for peace” in the Persian Gulf and beyond? How about the Houthi? They’re our Iranian partners for peace’s partners for peace in Yemen, and they were awfully sporting to let our diplomats flee without beheading them.

“Violent extremism” may have nothing to do with Islam, yet Obama’s summit on “violent extremism” was oddly preoccupied with Islam, to the extent of according it a special deference:

A Muslim prayer was recited at the start of the second day of the White House summit on “Countering Violent Extremism,” but no other religious text was presented during the portion of the event that was open to the press.

Imam Sheikh Sa’ad Musse Roble, president of the World Peace Organization in Minneapolis, Minn., recited a “verse from the Quran” following remarks by Obama administration officials and Democratic members of Congress.

But hey, what’s so odd about that? “Islam has been woven into the fabric of our country since its founding,” says the President. You might think that Islam has been entirely irrelevant to “the fabric of our country” for its first two centuries, and you might further think that Islam, being self-segregating, tends not to weave itself into anybody’s fabric but instead tends to unravel it – as it’s doing in, say, Copenhagen, where 500 mourners turned up for the funeral of an ISIS-supporting Jew-hating anti-free-speech murderer.

But President Obama knows better than you. So he organized a summit dedicated to creating and promoting a self-invented phantom enemy. Conveniently enough, the main problem with “violent extremists” is that its principal victims are Muslims. No, no, I don’t mean the thousands of Muslims being slaughtered, beheaded, burned alive, raped, sold into sex slavery, etc, etc, in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria, and so on. The Muslims most at risk are right here in America. Just ask Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson:

We in the administration and the government should give voice to the plight of Muslims living in this countryand the discrimination that they face. And so I personally have committed to speak out about the situation that very often people in the Muslim community in this country face. The fact that there are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world and the Islamic faith is one about peace and brotherhood.

I opposed the creation of the Department of Homeland Security on the basic Thatcherite principle that if you create a government bureaucracy in order to deal with a problem you’ll never be rid of the problem. But I underestimated the creativity of our rulers: The DHS was set up because 19 Muslims flew planes into skyscrapers and killed thousands of people. Thirteen years later, the head of the DHS thinks his department’s priority should be to “give voice to the plight of Muslims” who have the misfortune to live in America.

How about “the plight of Muslims” who live in Muslim countries? As I wrote in 2006 in the very prologue of the highly prescientAmerica Alone:

In the 2005 rankings of Freedom House’s survey of personal liberty and democracy around the world, five of the eight countries with the lowest “freedom” score were Muslim. Of the 46 Muslim majority nations in the world, only three were free. Of the 16 nations in which Muslims form between 20 and 50 per cent of the population, only another three were ranked as free: Benin, Serbia and Montenegro, and Suriname. It will be interesting to follow France’s fortunes as a fourth member of that group.

The “plight” of Muslim communities in America and the west is that they enjoy freedoms they could never dream of back in Somalia or Syria or anywhere else – but that they value those freedoms less than they value the pre-eminence of Islam. Canadian reader Sam Williamson wrote to me with what I thought was an interesting insight into the millions of “moderate Muslims”:

Hello Mark:

Suppose the moderate shoe was in the other foot:

You are a moderate Christian and there is a radical bunch at the far end of the spectrum of the faith that causing violence, even in your new country. Your faith is growing worldwide in numbers. You see other faiths abandoning their beliefs, and even making laws about where they may practice. But your religion is more welcomed. They say it strengthens the country. It’s in their constitution. Other countries are asking you to come.

So you can’t help but see your faith gaining influence. In some places no shopping on the Holy Day laws are being re-introduced. In some public schools they are allowing Mass to be said in the cafeteria during the day. Offensive comments about our Church, Saviour, and Saints are being condemned. And items from other religions are being hidden or removed so we don’t have to see them. Many people, including their wise teachers, professors, and prominent people in the papers and television are helping getting rid of many customs that we do not support as Catholics. Why even the other day a leader in government told the Prime Minister that it was wrong not to allow us to say the rosary during the Citizenship Ceremony.

Sure, we will condemn that bombing and those extremists if asked. They don’t represent my beliefs. But looking at the future I’m thinking my family, my children and grandchildren are going to do better in this country when it’s all Christians, and those wrong beliefs have left, and the atheists driven out, even if it is accomplished with some fear and violence. After all, ours is the one true religion and our people will once again be great.

Sam Williamson

If you were a “moderate Muslim”, what would you make of an extraordinary week in which the global superpower has piled up a mountain of preposterous, mutually contradictory official lies all designed to flatter you: Islam has been part of the fabric of America since the 18th century, and yet the plight of Muslims in this country and the discrimination they face has never been worse. We are at war with the mysterious shadowy Empire of Violentia-Extremistan, which is nothing to do with Islam, yet necessitates the saying of Muslim prayers – and Muslim prayers only – at official US government events.

On The Hugh Hewitt Show yesterday, I pointed out that the French Government estimates that some nine thousand “Frenchmen” have volunteered to fight for ISIS. That is approximately half the total western deployment in Afghanistan of around 18,000 troops from some four dozen countries. It is larger than any French military deployment in the last half-century. That 500-strong congregation of mourners for the Copenhagen killer may not be the largest funeral turnout in Denmark’s history, but it’s similarly impressive.

And yet none of that could be discussed in Washington, at a summit arising directly out of the Charlie Hebdo slaughter.

I have quoted before my old friend Theodore Dalrymple on the purposes of lies in totalitarian societies:

In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control.

We are at war with a depraved enemy, but we cannot be allowed to assert our moral superiority even to head-choppers, rapists, slavers and immolators. Thus the priority of Barack (“Hey, how ’bout those Crusades?”) Obama has been to undermine our sense of probity, and make us not merely equivalent to but worse than our enemies. That was the purpose of this last week of Official Lies.

Cultural Suicide: Why Allowing Syrian War Refugees to Enter Western Countries is a Pandora’s Box to More Attacks

February 19, 2015 / /

In its infinite wisdom the Obama administration announced plans to dramatically increase the number of Syrian War refugees being accepted into the confines of our borders. As of this writing, the largest concentrations of resettled refugees are in California, Illinois and Texas. As one would guess, there some serious concerns with the very real (and likely) possibility of terrorists associated with the Islamic State (IS) entering our country under the “refugee” label. DoS claims that “only the small minority who are in the most dire need, including the very young, ailing and elderly, and people who have been persecuted by their government” will be resettled in our country. The problem with that is the “very young” tend to have parents and siblings who tend to follow them – but the Obama administration conveniently leaves out those inconvenient details. DoS also makes the claim that they’re actually going to “screen” applicants, but how well they screened the Boston Bombers (the Russians had warned us about those two) doesn’t inspire much confidence from our staff. Its also worth noting that the Obama administration has been saying that the screening process is more “rigorous” since 2009 – so when was the Boston Bombing again?

U.S. to accept Syrian refugees in greater numbers after slow start

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-refugees-20141211-story.html

US Officials Admit Concern Over Syrian Refugee Effort

http://abcnews.go.com/International/officials-fear-syrian-refugees-pose-threat-us/story?id=28930114

waheeb

Coming soon to a neighborhood near you…
Source: The Daily Telegraph (UK)

Remember, this is the same Obama administration via DHS that lost track of over 6,000 foreigners last year who overstayed their visas. As much as the Obama administration would like for you to believe, the ugly truth is the US government doesn’t have any real checks and balances nor does it have the political will to properly enforce the current immigration laws on the books. People applying for visas of any kind, refugee status/political asylum from countries like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Algeria, Libya, Syria, Iraq – places where most of the populations despise us – red-flags should immediately be raised that should result in the application being promptly rejected. Unfortunately, people working in immigration and customs tend to simply push them along no questions asked – and that’s not even getting into the Pandora’s Box that allowing more Syrian refugees into our country would open.

DHS Loses 6,000

http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=1580

If you want to get a glimpse into America’s future all one needs to do is to look at Europe. As we discussed in our recent piece titled “The Jews: Europe’s Canary in the Mine on the Growing Jihadist Threat,” we laid out how years of political correctness and failed social experimentation has led to serious problems bubbling to the surface in Europe. Specifically, we showed how the EU members’ refusal to confront the jihadist threat has led to an increase in terror attacks with Denmark used as a case-study. Countries like Denmark, France, Germany, Belgium and the UK have been extremely generous in taking in Syrian War refugees and immigrants from other nations with large jihadist populations. Common sense says that Gulf nations refusing to take in refugees should be a huge red-flag to the US and its European counterparts. Unfortunately it isn’t. We just had a series of attacks in France from DEC 14 – JAN 15 and two more shootings in Denmark over the weekend, yet Europe continues to live with the delusional concept of “multiculturalism.”

A prime example of this is the threat that people just now realized exists from Libya on the other side of the Mediterranean. IS clearly sees the many vulnerabilities inside Europe in terms of how easy it is to gain access to member nations, as demonstrated by calls from the terror organization to infiltrate the continent posing as migrants. Indeed, Libya is a “gateway” to Europe but so are Turkey and Cyprus. Due to EU members being so inviting, the US also runs the risk of failing to notice individuals of Middle Eastern/North African origins who obtained dual-citizenship who attempt to enter our country on a European passport. If these people wanted to truly integrate they wouldn’t be trying to push the issue with “Sharia Enforcement Zones” and forcing everybody to bend over to their cultural demands. The truth is most of the people coming from the above-mentioned countries have no desire to integrate into western society despite being all too happy to receive those welfare checks (like a certain Anjem Choudray). Europe is dying, only the European people and the naive politicians they elected to office don’t yet realize it. If America isn’t careful, our fate will be similar to their’s – and it will happen much sooner than you think. It may sound cold, but allowing these people into our country isn’t worth the risk…

The Jews: Europe’s Canary in the Mine on the Growing Jihadist Threat

http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=4939

Islamic State ‘planning to use Libya as gateway to Europe’

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/islamic-state/11418966/Islamic-State-planning-to-use-Libya-as-gateway-to-Europe.html

Attack in Paris, France Kills 12

http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=4336

Islamic State: The French Connection

http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=3875

ISIS Attack Plot Thwarted in Belgium – A Sign of Things to Come?

http://isisstudygroup.com/?p=1890

Obama ISIS Map

The world burns while President Obama exhibits Nero-like characteristics – just substitute the golf clubs for a fiddle.
Source: The ISIS Study Group

***

Also see Refugee Resettlement Watch archives on Syrian Refugees:

https://refugeeresettlementwatch.wordpress.com/?s=syrian+refugees

Counterterrorism Chief: ‘Momentum and Competition’ Among Terrorist Groups Increasing Threat to U.S.

B9Vj3sdIIAAbBnFPJ Media, By Bridget Johnson On February 11, 2015:

WASHINGTON — The head of the nation’s counterterrorism efforts told Congress today that the flow of foreign fighters pledging their allegiance to ISIS not only poses a threat to the U.S., but “momentum and competition” with other terrorist groups has ramped up the danger as well.

House Homeland Security Chairman Mike McCaul (R-Texas) warned that, with the Islamic State swallowing enough territory to equal Belgium, “we are no longer talking about terrorist groups — we are talking about terrorist armies.”

“More than 20,000 fighters from over 90 countries have made their way to the battlefield to join al-Qaeda, ISIS and other extremist groups, making this the largest convergence of Islamist terrorists in world history,” McCaul said.

Up to 5,000 of those are Westerners, raising concerns about their ability to move back and forth from the Islamic State to their homelands. “And more than 150 American citizens have attempted to or succeeded in getting to the battlefield, and we know that some of them have already returned to our shores,” the chairman noted.

McCaul recently wrote President Obama out of concern “that we still have no lead agency in charge of countering domestic radicalization and no line item for it in the budgets of key departments and agencies.”

“I’m also concerned that the few programs we do have in place are far too small to confront a threat that has grown so quickly,” he added.

The chairman was “very disappointed” that the State Department sent no representative to the hearing.

National Counterterrorism Center director Nick Rasmussen, in his first appearance before a congressional hearing since his confirmation, told the panel the rate of foreign fighter travel seen in recent years is “unprecedented,” exceeding “the rate of travel and travelers who went to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Yemen or Somalia… at any point in the last 20 years.”

McCaul and Ranking Member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) announced they’re forming a six-month congressional task force focused on how to disrupt the travel flow of Islamist fighters.

On the propaganda front, Rasmussen said ISIS has published more than 250 videos and publications since Jan. 1 with “translations into an ever-growing number of additional languages.”

Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas), a former CIA officer, asked how the administration is countering the social media proliferation of ISIS as they use Facebook and Twitter to recruit and spread their P.R. materials. “Twenty percent of any counter-insurgency is cutting off the head of the snake, 80 percent is addressing the underlying concerns,” he said.

Rasmussen said the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, the Department of Justice and NCTC are trying to be as “seamless as we could, I think, almost possibly be in terms of our work together.”

The question is, he said, is scale: “Are we doing enough of it? Do we have enough reach into all of the parts of the country where this is a potential problem? And I would not argue to you that we’re there yet on that score.”

Rep. Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) asked the counterterrorism chief if al-Qaeda is still “alive and well.”

“They certainly pose a significant terrorist threat,” Rasmussen replied.

“So we shouldn’t take our eye off the ball with just focusing on ISIS and think of this globally and not get hung up on the 50 shades of terrorism,” Duncan said, referring to groups including AQAP, Boko Haram, and Al-Shabaab and to the S&M movie opening on Valentine’s Day.

Officials acknowledged that most of the foreign fighters going into Syria are crossing the Turkish border.

“Success in the counter-ISIL campaign or any effort we’re engaged in to try to stem the flow of foreign fighters into and out of the conflict zone requires a functioning, effective partnership with the Turks across the whole range of issues — intelligence, law enforcement, diplomacy, all of that,” Rasmussen said. “It’s also true, though, that Turkey will always look at its interests through the prism of their own sense of self-interest, and how they prioritize particular requests that we make for cooperation doesn’t always align with our prioritization. And that’s just a simple fact.”

He added that the State Department, which pulled a no-show at the hearing, could have given a better picture on that complicated relationship.

“There are areas where we receive profoundly effective cooperation from our Turkish partners and it’s tremendously useful, and yet from our perspective, we think there’s more to the relationship that we could get more that we need from the relationship to effectively address our concerns,” the NCTC chief said.

Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-Ga.) asked how the U.S. government is working with Internet companies “to help combat the use of the Internet and social media to spread…radical Islamic idealism.”

“This partnership has a number of elements. It’s in part exposing them to the information about what is happening on platforms that they control so they understand it. And if they can understand when terms of service violations are taking place that they should intervene and take steps to block certain content,” Rasmussen responded.

“But it’s also to — again, to deepen a partnership and make sure that they understand that we need to be partners with them in going at this more systemically, not simply in response to a single video or a single YouTube posting or something, but actually to think about what kind of relationship between the federal government, law enforcement and these companies makes sense if we’re going to tackle this phenomenon that’s creating a serious homeland security vulnerability.”

YouTube takes down videos showing violent content, and some ISIS users on Twitter have gone through many account names to reassert their presence after the social-media site shuts down one account.

“They try to follow the terms of agreement, and certainly, if they see individuals violating those terms, those service agreement contracts, they shut them down. But when you’re talking with that volume, it’s a challenge for them. So I would say they understand our problem,” Rasmussen said. “We continue to work with them to get them to develop process technology to help us out. But that’s just one part of it.”

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) said she hopes the committee will “ramp up the dollars that will intervene in that radical heinous ideology.”

“I, for one, would like to be engaged in the writing of the legislation and/or to find out more in an instructive manner, how do we stop the radicalization of our young people for something as heinous as what ISIS represents,” Jackson Lee said, throwing in a special thanks for Jordan’s King Abdullah II for his offensive against ISIS.

Rasmussen said one thing “particularly concerning about the ISIL phenomenon is that ISIL has now decided it needs to move beyond Syria and Iraq — and so you have extremist organizations in North Africa, Algeria, in Egypt, in Libya, who now have raised the flag of ISIL and claimed affiliate status.”

“And again, that creates a sense of momentum and competition among extremist jihadist groups that ultimately adds to our threat concerns, doesn’t subtract. Even though you like to see your enemies fighting amongst each other, but actually, it’s creating competition against each — among — amongst each other as they try to one-up each other in efforts to go after us.”

***

McCaul Opening Statement at Hearing on Preventing Terror Travel, Homegrown Terrorism

 

McCaul Questions DHS, FBI, NCTC at Hearing on Preventing Terror Travel, Homegrown Terrorism

Urgent Update on Border Terror Threat – Narco-Islamist Connection Exposed

border-crisisJudicial Watch, by Tom Fitton, Oct. 10, 2014:

There are times when all of us hate to say, “I told you so.” And the latest news from Judicial Watch on the apprehension of ISIS terrorists on the U.S.-Mexico border is certainly one of them.

In late August, you may recall, JW broke the story that Islamic terrorist organizations are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez where they plan to stage attacks against the U.S. In response to this threat, agents in the departments of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense had all been placed on alert and told to work to counter the imminent threat.  Two days after our initial report, Fort Bliss, the massive installation in El Paso, increased its security in response to this international terrorist threat.

But then the Obama spin machine cranked up. A spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security officially denied the report, telling the London Daily Mail,“we are aware of absolutely nothing credible to substantiate this claim.” The DHS official duplicitously added, “In Mexico? I haven’t seen that at all.”
White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest also responded, telling the newspaper that “the most detailed intelligence assessment that I can offer from here is that there is no evidence or indication right now that [the Islamic State group] is actively plotting to attack the United States homeland. That’s true right now.”

At Judicial Watch, we pulled no punches in standing by our story. We told the Daily Mail that JW’s sources were “golden,” and that the government’s denial constituted a “non-denial denial.” As I pointed out, the words “credible” and “specific” were rhetorical loopholes that one “could drive a truck bomb through,” the paper reported.

This week, Judicial Watch investigations resulted in two more bombshell reports.

First, on October 5, JW’s Corruption Chronicles blog posted an important story detailing how a “sophisticated narco-terror ring with connections running from El Paso to Chicago to New York City had been uncovered with the help of Judicial Watch.”  The details are extraordinary.  The story involves two of the FBI’s Most Wanted, plus a logistics and transportation operative for militant Islamists in the United States and an illegal alien with an extensive criminal record in El Paso, Texas.

Emad Karakrah, and Hector Pedroza Huerta are currently in jail for separate offenses in different states—Karakrah in Cook County Illinois and Huerta in El Paso. But in 2009 they partnered to plan a Chicago truck bombing that was thwarted. Between December 2010 and February 2011, Huerta and Karakrah also planned two additional bomb plots targeting oil refineries in Houston and the Fort Worth Stockyards, according to Judicial Watch’s federal law enforcement sources.

Before that Karakrah and Huerta met with two of the FBI’s “Most Wanted” terrorists: Jaber A. Elbaneh and Adnan Gulshair el Shukrijumah (a/k/a: “Javier Robles”). Meetings took place in a private home a few years ago in Anthony, NM. The four men discussed the movement of drugs, money and people. The plots were further planned by fellow conspirators at a “mosque” on Redd Road in El Paso, as well as two other “mosques” in the city. Karakrah, Huerta, Elbaneh and el Shukrijumah all met again in Anthony, NM, in March 2014, according to Judicial Watch sources.

The urgency is real, as Huerta is alleged to have smuggled explosives and weapons from, ironically, the Fort Bliss range and exercise areas in concert with corrupt US Army soldiers and government contractors with gate passes at the El Paso base.

The recent, seemingly unrelated, arrests of Karakrah and Huerta expose the nexus of Islamic terror and drug cartel trafficking operating from El Paso. With both Karakrah and Huerta in custody, federal law enforcement officials have an extraordinary opportunity to break the powerful narco-terrorism grip on El Paso – assuming they can overcome internecine turf wars between the various agencies of the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security.  Judicial Watch “connected the dots” in this narco-terrorism network for federal law enforcement.

This exposé was followed by another Judicial Watch revelation.  On October 8, JW’s Corruption Chronicles blog posted another major story detailing how federal authorities and other officials with the Texas Department of Public Safety in McAllen and Pharr had apprehended four Islamic terrorists crossing the border from Mexico into the U.S. just 36 hours earlier.

JW’s information was confirmed by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) Hunter revealed on national television that at least 10 fighters from the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria – known as ISIS – have been caught crossing into the U.S. from Mexico in Texas. Duncan said his source of the information is the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), the agency responsible for patrolling and safeguarding the porous southern border.

As described above, just two days after our first August 29th report, Ft. Bliss, the U.S. Army post in El Paso, implemented heightened security measures. Military officials who spoke with us said the increased security demonstrates that Ft. Bliss is a terrorist target. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Jerry Boykin, former commander of the Army’s elite Delta Force, who also served four years as Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, made it clear to us that military installations in the U.S. only make changes to security measures when they know of a specific threat.

“That means they’re getting a threat stream. Ft. Bliss had to have a clear and present threat,” Boykin said.

Despite all of JW’s comprehensive reporting, high-level Obama officials and allies are looking to silence our reporting and attack the messenger. This includes Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-Texas) who telephoned the area offices of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) and the U.S. Border Patrol (USBP) in an effort to identify sources that have been used by JW to break the ISIS story.

It appears that top officials of the Obama administration are lying about ISIS terrorist activities on our border. Nevertheless, federal agents on the front lines are working to keep you safe and appreciate Judicial Watch’s clarion calls about security on the border. Rest assured that your JW will not back down on ferreting out the truth, and we will keep you fully informed.

Have We Reached Peak ISISmania Yet?

ISIS3-550x282PJ Media, By Patrick Poole:

A few thoughts on the current bout of ISISmania and the systemic problems it exposes:

1) ISISmania has created a financial/legal incentive for sources (most of them “shady” to begin with) used by law enforcement and intelligence agencies to manufacture info whole-cloth.

This is nothing new. Think “prison snitches.” Various foreign actors are passing along disinformation to us as well, so mountains of BS are being fed into the system from the get-go.

Imagine, for a purely hypothetical example, a member of Congress getting an authentic report from a senior agency official, but the report is later found to have originated with a non-credible source. So the member of Congress who repeated the report was actually correct that the intel had been shared with them — but the information itself wasn’t reliable.

It never should have been shared in the first place, but it’s the member of Congress who ends up with egg on their face when the agency issues its denial. No one, whether politicians or agency officials, wants to later admit they were duped, so erroneous info never gets corrected.

2) There are considerable problems on the collection and analysis sides of intel in both the intelligence community and law enforcement. In fact, very few know how to do collection — and good analysis is basically prohibited these days.

So the BS and disinfo never gets sifted out. It then gets passed on to elected officials, which is some of what we’re seeing. Then you have agencies and the administration selectively manipulate and leak according to their own respective agendas. This is how the sausage is being made in DC these days.

3) There is only so much media space, and politicians compete with each other for that space.

So they need to come up with more outlandish claims to get a bigger share of that media space. That creates a disincentive to vet the info they get and publicly talk about. No one gets on Greta by saying: “We need to keep a cool head about this stuff.”

4) Because of that, the game of “I got a secret” is more prevalent than ever before.

Those secrets might be complete equine feces, but the desire to be “in the know,” whether they actually are or not, and the temptation to show that you’re “in the know,” is strong.

5) Congress has no mechanism to vet what the agencies and administration tells them.

 

Back in the 1990s there wase a House Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare that gave Congress direct access to the intelligence and SPECOPS worlds to be able to know if what the admin at the time — regardless of party — was saying was true or not.

That’s gone. Congress itself has no internal vetting system to speak of. They are at the mercy of the Executive Branch.

6) The threats are escalating so rapidly, no one in D.C. wants to be holding the bag when something actually happens.

They’ve learned from 9/11 that they don’t want to be the one saying: “Yeah, I knew about it but never said anything publicly.” Everyone wants a chair when the music stops, so they are all trying to lay down their markers now to show they were trying to do something about it beforehand — whether they actually were or not.

Understand, much of this has nothing to do with actually preventing terrorism, but with political posturing.

7) Don’t even get me going about people in the D.C. media/foreign policy establishment — e.g., the think tanks.

There are some solid policy analysts out there doing very good work, but much of it goes unrecognized or never gets considered. That said, the vast majority of these analysts won’t do anything that gets them disinvited to a D.C. cocktail party or criticized by the cool kids on Twitter.

An M.A. in International Relations from Johns Hopkins/Georgetown/Harvard doesn’t mean that you have the slightest idea of what you’re talking about. Analysis takes years of study and practice — but try telling that to your average 25-year-old policy wonk. And yet these are the characters that drive much the narrative, increasingly so as social media favored by the younger crowd drives much of the news cycle these days.

8) Because so much BS is being slung about, it is actually crowding out good intel.

There are actual border threats from various terrorist groups and actors currently being investigated. But none of that info will ever see the light of day because people inside the system know it will get lumped in with all the disinformation grabbing the headlines right now.

9) Because this administration seeks to maintain an iron grip over the flow of information, virtually any leak is subject to some variety of mole hunt.

It may not lead to official discipline, but perhaps to the imposition of other unofficial forms of discipline, like getting cut out of the loop, which is the kiss of death. That said, I personally know of whistleblowers getting hammered right now by their agencies for calling attention to these kinds of threats, or for trying to get information to Congress.

And Congress has still not created substantive legal protections for whistleblowers, so that creates a severe disincentive for accurate info making its way out.

(Note that the Democrats control the gavel in the Senate, and the impotent and incompetent GOP leadership that governs the House consistently refuses to exercise their oversight powers (particularly committee chairmen). That’s why it is taking YEARS for info related to the litany of Obama administration scandals from coming to light. And when the info becomes public, it is frequently due to groups outside the political establishment. Judicial Watch has done the yeomans work in this regard — not Congress — on the IRS, Fast and Furious, et al.)

10) Elections in four weeks increase all of these by an order of magnitude. So I’m not sure we’ve reached peak ISISmania yet.

There are actual threats to the homeland out there, including ISIS, but virtually all that we’re seeing in the media at the moment is political theater and the accumulation of serious systemic problems within the intelligence and law enforcement agencies.

And much of this nonsense is going to get more Americans killed.

Also see:

Americans Fighting for ISIS: Keeping Them Out vs. Luring Them In

1408801449089_wps_3_isis_tweets_us_comp_jpgCenter for Security Policy, by Ben Lerner, Sep.11,2014:

As several Members of Congress have begun calling for the revocation of passports of US citizens fighting for ISIS in order to keep American jihadists who have trained overseas from returning to the United States and carrying out attacks here, Washington Free Beacon reports that American intelligence is cautious about a similar proposal being offered with respect to  British citizens by Prime Minister David Cameron of the United Kingdom:

While such [passport revocation] measures serve as an appropriate response to the alarming trend of Western recruits joining terror groups such as Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant and al Qaeda, members of the American intelligence community have warned that the policy could result in an overall loss of valuable intelligence.

The U.S. counterterrorism strategy has been to “lure in” militants returning from Iraq or Syria with the hopes of extracting detailed information about ground operations, recruitment, and designs for attacks on the homeland. Cameron’s strategy, on the other hand, imposes strict no-fly restrictions on travelers returning from Iraq and Syria with the goal of ‘excluding’ British citizens from the U.K.

Although it is unclear which “members of the American intelligence community” are expressing these concerns, and whether they are outliers or are representing a consensus view, there are two problems with the “lure in” objection to passport revocation with respect to US citizens:

1)  The fact that they’re here doesn’t mean we’ll be able to track them.  Recent revelations that the Department of Homeland Security has lost contact with 58,000 expired student visa holders – 6,000 of which are subjects “heightened concern” that may pose threats to national security – do not inspire confidence that our resource-constrained intelligence bureaucracy will be able to successfully track jihadist operatives that we’ve “lured in”.

Such an approach would seem especially risky when the subjects are themselves the would-be attackers, as opposed to support components like recruiters or financiers.  We may indeed (on a case-by-case basis) want to lure in the latter to uncover terrorist plots, but when the individual in question is himself the plot — the trigger-puller, the bomb-detonator, the virus-carrier – preventing entry ought to be the priority.  If these guys disappear into the crowd, it could be too late to prevent anything.

2)  Even if we can track them, that doesn’t mean we’ll be able to extract intelligence from them.  The Obama administration has shown that it’s more inclined to let jihadists on US soil lawyer up and remain silent, such as in the case of the Christmas Day underwear bomber of 2009 and the Boston Marathon bomber of 2013.  The military might have success in “extracting detailed information” from such individuals if allowed to detain them as enemy combatants before turning them over to law enforcement (even if as US citizens they are ineligible for trial by military commissions), but that appears unlikely under this administration.

ABC News: Goverment Lost Track Of Thousands On Student Visas

 

Truth Revolt, by  Larry O’Connor:

Brian Ross of ABC News presented a stunning report Monday night showing a breakdown in tracking foreign nationals on student visas in America.  According to the report, authorities are investigating the whereabouts of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who arrived in the US on student visas and have vanished, their whereabouts and their intentions unknown.

“They just disappear,” said Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) a member of the Senate Homeland Security Oversight Committee.

As Ross pointed out, “That’s just what happened with the 9/11 hijackers who flew the passenger jet into the Pentagon and authorities say the problem continues.”

Tom Kean, chairman of the 9/11 Commission, told Ross, “The fact that nobody has done anything about it yet, that’s a very dangerous thing for all of us.”

Ross’ investigation also found that Homeland Security certifies 86 beauty schools, 36 massage schools and 9 schools that teach horseshoe-ing, all valid for US visas.

Ross challenged Peter Edge, the government official who heads-up ICE investigations into student visa fraud, on the issue and his on-camera response was less than reassuring. Edge confirmed that thousands of foreign nationals have “virtually” disappeared in the country and he couldn’t explain the vital national interest in allowing foreigners into the country to study the art of “hoseshoe-ing.”

The report featured a school that is under criminal investigation for violating student visa law. The school basically offered easy access to a student visa for the price of tuition. When Ross asked him why the school still appears on a Homeland Security list of certified schools for student visas, Edge simply replied, “Brian, I can only say this is the United States of America and everyone has due process.”

ISIS has Capability and Intent to Attack the Homeland

IS-facts-findingsBlind Eagle, By Brian Fairchild, Aug. 30, 2014:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

  • Based on the intelligence analysis of the facts and findings below, as of August 29, 2014, the Islamic State has the capability and intent to launch an attack against the American homeland.  Moreover, the internecine war between “core” al Qaeda and the Islamic State represents a struggle for the leadership of the international jihad movement that provides both organizations with a strong motivation to attack America.  There is no way to predict a specific date when attacks will occur, but it is clear from the evidence that the Islamic State has the capability to launch an attack at a time and place of its choosing.

In intelligence analysis, analysts must first find and document substantiated and relevant Facts on the topic of their investigations.  Expert knowledge is then used to make sense out of these facts in a cogent, organized and articulate manner in a section called Findings.  Having made sense out of the facts in the articulated findings, the analyst can then see where all of the facts and findings lead, and make a Forecast as to what is likely to happen in the future.  It’s not a perfect or foolproof system, but it forces analysts to work with well-substantiated and relevant facts rather than opinion and hearsay.

On August 22, 2014, Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby stated that the Defense Department does not believe that ISIS has “the capability right now to conduct a major attack on the U.S. homeland.”

The following analysis will test this hypothesis using the tried and true method of establishing Facts, Findings, and Forecasts.

FACTS:

  • On October 4, 2011, then leader of al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) and current leader of the Islamic State (IS), Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, was declared a Specially Designated Global Terrorist by the State Department for his role in “managing and directing large scale operations”.
  • ISIS is a multi-faceted entity:

o   According to Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, the Islamic State demonstrates “a sophistication of strategic and tactical military prowess”,[1] and represents an “imminent threat to every interest we have”.

o   IS has “…an effective management structure…overseeing departments of finance, arms, local governance, military operations and recruitment”[2].  It operates like a national government in the areas it occupies providing electricity and water, levying taxes, providing police services, establishing religious schools and courts, and running training camps.

o   IS has a war chest estimated at $2 billion dollars, accrued from:  taxes, the sale of oil and antiquities on the black market, ransom for hostages, seized bank assets, donations from wealthy Gulf donors, the theft of all property and assets from the minorities it victimizes, and proceeds from zakat (tithing) and Muslim charities.

o   A report prepared in June 2014 by the former head of the counter terrorism office of British Intelligence (MI6), reported that over 12,000 radicalized Muslims have departed their homes in 81 countries to join the jihad in Syria and Iraq.  An estimated 3,000 of them are western passport holders.  These individuals are now routinely referred to as “foreign fighters”.  There is no doubt that the number of foreign fighters overall and the number hailing from Western countries has significantly increased since the publication of this report, which went to press before al Baghdadi announced the creation of the “Caliphate” and called for Muslims to emigrate to it.

o   IS has a virtual monopoly over the foreign fighters flooding into Syria and Iraq.  They constitute the majority of IS’ suicide bombers, and are responsible for 30 to 50 suicide bombings per month.[3]  Increasingly, they come from Western countries including the US, France, the UK, Norway, Austria, Australia, and Germany. They are infiltrated into the Islamic State via a global IS network, and then trained in secure bases there.[4]

  • On February 4, 2014, CIA Director John Brennan testified before the Congressional House Intelligence Committee during which he described the capabilities of these  training camps: 

o   We are concerned about the use of Syrian territory by the Al Qaida organization to recruit individuals and develop the capability to be able not just to carry out attacks inside of Syria, but also to use Syria as a launching pad…There arecamps inside of both Iraq and Syria that are used by Al Qaida to develop capabilities that are applicable, both in the theater, as well as beyond.” 

  • The Islamic State possesses chemical weapons seized from Iraq’s al Muthanna chemical weapons complex, including munitions containing Sarin, Mustard gas, and the nerve agent VX.  In 2006, then Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency Lt. General Michael Maples stated that, while the munitions couldn’t be used as originally intended because of corrosion, “The agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents”.[5]

o   In July 2014, IS fighters seized 88 pounds of uranium compounds from the University of Mosul that can be used to construct a radioactive dirty bomb.

  • IS was formerly constituted as al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), but was disowned by “core” al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri in February 2014.  This fracture resulted in all-out war between the two groups for the leadership of the international jihad movement.
  • Despite his war with “core” al Qaeda, IS leader al Baghdadi reveres Osama bin Laden.  When bin Laden was killed in the American raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan, he vowed violent retaliation.  Almost immediately, he launched numerous attacks and suicide bombings, and vowed to conduct 100 attacks across Iraq to seek vengeance for bin Laden”.[6]
  • On January 21, 2014, al Baghdadi recorded an audio message in which he recognized that he and his organization would soon be in direct confrontation with the United States:

o   “Our last message is to the Americans. Soon we will be in direct confrontation, and the sons of Islam have prepared for such a day. So watch, for we are with you, watching.”[7]

  • In August 2014, IS declared war against the US in a document sent to the family of beheading victim James Foley.  It was addressed to the “American government and their sheep like people” and threatened the following (all emphasis added by IS in the original):

o   “Today our swords are unsheathed towards you, GOVERNMENT AND CITIZENS ALIKE!  AND WE WILL NOT STOP UNTIL WE QUENCH OUR THIRST FOR YOUR BLOOD.  You do not spare our weak, elderly, women or children, so we will NOT spare yours!  You and your citizens will pay the price of your bombings!  The first of which being the blood of American citizen, James Foley.”

  • In response to US airstrikes against IS positions in early August 2014, al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP)pledged solidarity with the Islamic State and promised to conduct mass casualty attacks against the US in retaliation:

o   “Hence, we declare our solidarity with our Muslim brethren in Iraq in [their struggle against] this Crusade. Their blood is our blood, their wound is in our hearts, and we have a duty to defend them. With Allah’s help, we will employ every means to cause the US as many casualties as possible, as part of jihad for the sake of Allah and in order to realize what our Sheikh Osama [bin Laden] vowed [to achieve].”

FINDINGS:

  • As made clear by the 2011 State Department designation of al Baghdadi as a global terrorist, he is adept at “managing and directing large scale operations”.  The Islamic State reflects these abilities.  It is a sophisticated organization that simultaneously plans and conducts offensive operations using conventional military strategy, as well as synchronized multiple-location suicide bombings, all the while operating a global network that recruits, trains and deploys foreign fighters.  Underlying its military capabilities is a government structure of provincial governors and officials that manage the civilian population like a small nation state.
  • IS has thousands of trained and combat-tested foreign fighters from which to select teams that could conduct attacks in the United States, including over 100 Americans.  The Islamic State is not restricted to using only American citizens for such attacks, and for security reasons, may well create cells of individuals from the UK and Western Europe that are not likely to be revealed by US databases.  It is likely that many of these individuals speak English and have previously traveled to the US.
  • IS has a seemingly endless supply of foreign fighters willing to martyr themselves.  Suicide bombings, once rare, have become routine for IS foreign fighters who conduct approximately 30 to 50 each month.  Importantly, the majority of these bombings are conducted with a high degree of operational security against targets in cities such as Baghdad and Kirkuk where security forces are on high alert employing road blocks, patrols, and area surveillance.  IS teams deploying to the US face only one real security obstacle – physically entering the country; once inside they would operate in an environment much less controlled than those they are used to.
  • IS possesses chemical weapons and radioactive compounds that it could smuggle into the United States via the southern border or other access points.  Even in the event that IS has no smuggling connections, its remarkable treasury could well buy such cooperation.
  • Should IS leadership decide, its financial assets, and extensive number of trained and experienced operatives willing to die for their cause, are adequate to fund and deploy numerous terrorist teams worldwide.
  • Despite the increasing number of American airstrikes against IS positions, and the rising calls for extensive military action against IS targets in Iraq and Syria, there is no evidence to indicate that IS leadership seeks to avoid a military confrontation with the United States.  Quite the contrary, all evidence indicates that it is actively trying to provoke such a confrontation, as demonstrated by the following:

o   Al Baghdadi has been at war against the US since 2003 when he co-created his first jihad organization.  He experienced first-hand the American dismantling of AQI in 2006, he spent time in American custody in Camp Bucca, he replaced leaders killed by the US, and sought vengeance for the killing of Osama bin Laden.  Given this experience, it is likely that in January 2014 when he recorded his audio statement, he was well aware that his plan to blitzkrieg across Syria and Iraq and his plan to establish a Caliphate that threatened US allies would provoke an American military response.  In this context, the specific phrases he chose to stress:  “Soon we will be in direct confrontation” – “the sons of Islam have prepared for such a day” – “we are with you, watching”, could well indicate that in anticipation of the coming confrontation, he deployed cells to the homeland that are “watching” and preparing attacks.

o   IS leadership chose to publicly butcher James Foley on August 19, 2014 describing Foley as the first American casualty of war, which strongly suggests that Foley’s murder was a deliberate attempt to provoke a military response.  Additional examples of IS’ willingness to provoke the US are revealed in passages from its official Dabiq magazine, published on August 29, 2014, that ridicule President Obama, gloat over the beheading of James Foley and the US inability to rescue him, blame the US for atrocities against Muslims, and call for American and Western Muslims to rush to the “Caliphate” to support the jihad.

o   IS’ declaration of war against the US government and its citizens, including America’s weak, elderly, women and children can only be taken as a direct provocation.

  • The war between IS and “core” al Qaeda is, at its essence, a battle for the ideological leadership and operational direction of the international jihad movement.  At present, the Islamic State, flush with money and recruits, is winning.    If IS cells successfully attack the homeland in the near future it would virtually cement its leadership over the movement.  If it were successful in conducting an attack on the anniversary day of the 9/11 attacks, the Islamic State and al Baghdadi would be catapulted into a new terrorist dimension that would have profound security implications for the US for decades to come.
  • This war for primacy, however, is also likely to prompt “core” al Qaeda to launch an attack against the homeland to regain its lost leadership.  Because Zawahiri and Osama bin Laden planned and conducted the historic 9/11 attacks, a commemorative attack on 9/11’s thirteenth anniversary would likely re-establish Zawahiri as the movement’s premier leader.  It is not clear at this point, however, if “core” al Qaeda has the resources and capability to conduct such an attack.
  • AQAP’s pledge to conduct mass casualty attacks in retaliation for US airstrikes against IS fighters, adds another threat stream.  AQAP’s proven record of near misses against the US via the 2009 Underwear bomber plot, and the plot to blow up cargo aircraft over the US with explosives hidden in copy machine ink cartridges, is sobering, but further exacerbated by AQAP’s reported development of a new explosive compound that is undetectable by existing sensors.  Like “core” al Qaeda, it is unclear if AQAP has the resources to conduct a separate attack against the homeland.  In order to remain relevant in the international jihad movement, however, AQAP could assist IS in attacking the homeland, which could explain its pledge of solidarity to IS and its promise to carry-out mass casualty attacks.

FORECAST:

Based on the above facts and findings and contrary to the statements of the Pentagon, as of August 29, 2014, the Islamic State has all the capabilities required to launch an attack against the American homeland.  Within its ranks alone, it has the expertise, trained operatives, financial resources, possession of WMD, a virulent anti-American ideology, and the intent to confront the United States.  Despite increasing American military action against it, there is no evidence that the Islamic State is trying to avoid a military confrontation.  Rather, its recent actions are tailored to provoke a military response.

Moreover, the war between “core” al Qaeda and the Islamic State is a struggle for the ideological leadership and the operational direction of the international jihad movement that provides both organizations with a strong motivation to attack America.  Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s recent pledge of solidarity to IS and its promise to perpetrate mass casualty attacks on its behalf exacerbates an already bad situation.  While it is unclear if “core” al Qaeda and AQAP have the resources on their own to conduct such attacks, AQAP’s pledge of solidarity to IS may well indicate its willingness to conduct a joint IS-AQAP attack.

Absent specific actionable intelligence, there is no way to predict a specific date when attacks will occur, as all terrorist plots run according to operational requirements.  It is clear, however, that a successful attack on the American homeland by any or all of these organizations would boost their respective standing in the jihad movement, especially if such an attack was conducted on the anniversary of the 9/11 attacks.  It is also clear that the Islamic State has the capability to launch an attack at a time and place of its choosing.

 

ISIS in the Homeland

pic_giant_061614_SM_ISIS-in-the-HomelandBy Andrew G. Doran:

For a 500-mile stretch of territory that winds, more or less, along the Euphrates from Iraq to Syria, a regime of masked, sociopathic murderers reign in terror under the black flag of jihad.

This territory is not represented on any map of nation-states – a concept that little reflects realities in Iraq and Syria.  It is land claimed by the disciples of terrorist Abu Al Zarqawi. On June 10, the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) seized the city of Mosul in the Nineveh Province, capturing “arms and ammunition from the fleeing security forces” — arms and ammunition supplied by the American government, which will now be used to impose terror on defenseless civilians. The offensive coincides with a successful campaign by ISIS in eastern Syria. Perhaps there will be new detention centers of torture and murder; perhaps there will be more tweets proudly displaying crucifixions.

Like Zarqawi and bin Laden, these terrorists will not be satisfied to reign in the Hell of their own making in the Middle East, or with the toppling of insufficiently Islamic regimes, or even with winning the Sunni-Shia civil war that now rages. Their ultimate target will be the United States. They are coming this way. Perhaps as many as a dozen are already here – or, to be more precise, already back.

As Eli Lake recently reported in the Daily Beast, thousands of foreigners have gone to Syria to take up arms against the regime of Bashar Assad, serving with various rebel factions, most of which fall somewhere on the Islamist spectrum.

Thousands of these fighters are citizens of Western countries that have visa waivers for entry into the United States – in other words, they can travel here without any hassle at all. An intelligence source conveyed to Lake concerns that the NSA could not “track thousands of bad guys,” adding that “on the human-intelligence front, this is even more difficult.” These veterans of al-Qaeda and its affiliates constitute a fundamentally different threat than that which America faced in 2001: They are Western (at least in nationality); they are seasoned combat veterans; they are known, but perhaps too numerous to track.

After more than a decade of war in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere, the fatigue of the American people is palpable, which has prompted many to welcome President Obama’s winding down of the global War on Terror. Despite the president’s repeated claims on the campaign trail two years ago, the evidence suggests that al-Qaeda is not “on the path to defeat” or “on the run.” It is, rather, “morphing” and “franchising,” according to the director of national intelligence, James Clapper.

Yet in Syria, America’s commitment, however anemic, is to the overthrow of Assad, a contemptible and ruthless secular dictator but one whose regime is fighting al-Qaeda and its affiliates among the rebels. This paradox is apparently lost on those most keen on his overthrow. Competing objectives in Syria have caused America to lose focus on the principal enemy and principal threat: al-Qaeda and its affiliates.

If these Islamist veterans of the Syrian conflict succeed in pulling off a terrorist attack against the United States, the problem with  America’s policy in Syria will come into focus immediately. One can well imagine the hearings on Capitol Hill: “We knew these people were coming. Why was more not done to stop them? Why wasn’t the intelligence community given the resources it needed to track these terrorists? Why were we sending arms to overthrow the dictator who was trying to kill these terrorists who later killed Americans?” The foreign-policy priorities of the present will instantly be regarded as an unworthy distraction and forgotten. It is, of course, easy enough to ask these questions retrospectively; it is another thing altogether to ask them in advance — which prompts one to take notice when someone on the Hill does.

Read more at National Review

Administration eases restrictions on asylum seekers with loose terror ties

This undated file image posted on a militant website on Jan. 14, 2014 shows fighters from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) patrolling in Raqqa, Syria.AP

This undated file image posted on a militant website on Jan. 14, 2014 shows fighters from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) patrolling in Raqqa, Syria.AP

Fox News, Feb. 6,2014, By 

The Obama administration has unilaterally eased restrictions on asylum seekers with loose or incidental ties to terror and insurgent groups, in a move one senator called “deeply alarming.”

The change, approved by Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and Secretary of State John Kerry, was announced Wednesday in the Federal Register. It would allow some individuals who provided “limited material support” to terror groups to be considered for entry into the U.S.

Supporters of the change, including Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., argued that the current ban on anyone who has ever aided terrorists has unfairly blocked thousands of refugees.

“The existing interpretation was so broad as to be unworkable,” Leahy said in a statement. “It resulted in deserving refugees and asylees being barred from the United States for actions so tangential and minimal that no rational person would consider them supporters of terrorist activities.”

But critics say despite the good intentions, the change raises security concerns, particularly after a report published Thursday on asylum fraud.

“In light of these and other facts, it is thus deeply alarming that the Obama administration would move unilaterally to relax admissions standards for asylum seekers and potentially numerous other applicants for admission who have possible connections to insurgent or terrorist groups,” Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., said in a statement on Thursday. “We need to tighten security standards for asylum, not relax them even further.”

Sessions also complained that the administration was, on its own, altering the Immigration and Nationality Act. “What is the point of Congress passing a law if the administration abuses its ‘discretion’ to say that law simply no longer applies?” he said.

The change would apply to people the U.S. government does not consider a threat but could nevertheless be tied to terror groups, and therefore barred from entry. A Department of Homeland Security official said these individuals have been “adversely affected by the broad terrorism bars of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA).”

The official offered several examples of how the change might help otherwise innocent refugees — including a restaurant owner who served food to an opposition group; a farmer who paid a toll to such a group in order to cross a bridge or sell his food; or a Syrian refugee who paid an opposition group to get out of the country.

“These exemptions cover discrete kinds of limited material support that have adversely affected refugees, asylum seekers and immigrants and other travelers: material support to non-designated terrorist organizations that was insignificant in amount, provided incidentally in the course of everyday social, commercial, or humanitarian interactions, or provided under significant pressure,” the official said.

The official said the change would let the administration apply the exemptions on a “case-by-case basis” after a review that already includes rigorous security screening. “Our screening procedures check applicants’ names and fingerprints against a broad array of records of individuals known to be security threats, including the terrorist watch list, and those of law enforcement concern,” the official said.

Though the change would apply to those who helped non-designated terror groups, Sessions noted that Al Qaeda, for example, was not officially designated as a foreign terror organization until 1999.

Dan Stein, president of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, claimed the change was another effort to maximize the number of people being allowed into the country.

“This administration no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt in making these kinds of rule changes,” he said. “The consequences are potentially dire for … public safety.”

The Washington Times also reported Thursday that a 2009 fraud assessment found at least 70 percent of asylum applications had signs of fraud.

 

 

Megyn Kelly interviews Michael Cutler on the matter:

Michael Cutler, a Fellow at the Center for Immigration Studies, an advisor to the “911 Families for a Secure America,” and a consultant, retired in 2002 after a distinguished career with the INS of over 30 years, including 26 as a Special Agent. In 1991, he was promoted to the position of Senior Special Agent and was assigned to the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Force and worked with members of other federal and state law enforcement agencies as well as law enforcement organizations of other countries. The task force’s investigations of aliens involved in major drug trafficking organizations ultimately resulted in the seizure of their assets and prosecutions for a wide variety of criminal violations.

Mr. Cutler has testified as an expert witness at nine Congressional hearings on issues relating to the enforcement of immigration laws having been called by members of both political parties. Mr. Cutler also furnished testimony to the Presidential Commission on the Terrorist Attacks of September 11. Mr. Cutler has appeared on numerous television and radio programs including the O’Reilly Radio Factor, O’Reilly’s No Spin Zone, Fox News and the Lou Dobbs Tonight Program on CNN to discuss the enforcement of immigration laws and has participated in various public debates and panel discussions on issues involving the enforcement and administration of immigration laws. Among the areas of concern that he is able to speak about authoritatively are the nexus between immigration and national security, the impact of immigration on the criminal justice system, strategies to combat illegal immigration, and why amnesty for illegal aliens is wrong.

 

Also see:

What Will It Take?

oBy David Solway:

Let me begin with a categorical statement that, given current events and recent political history, can be easily defended: Barack Hussein Obama is a willful, indoctrinated child of the Left with strong Islamic sympathies who is not fit to govern. Indeed, he would not be fit to govern Lower Slobovia [1], let alone the United States of America. Obama is a historic disaster of the first magnitude and, if not restrained, he will see to the irrevocable decline of the country which foolishly elected him, leaving the world on the brink of a conflict — or in the midst of one — whose repercussions cannot be underestimated.

Accompanying the undeniable havoc and damage that Obama is wreaking on his country and equally on its allies — Honduras, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Poland, Czech Republic, Israel, and possibly Taiwan — is the sense of helplessness that overcomes one when writing or speaking about a rogue president and his destructive administration. I feel this personally, having done my utmost in books, articles and lectures, from 2008 to the present, to warn whomever might read or listen that Obama represented a greater threat to the U.S. and the oddly named “free world” than any of our most dedicated and belligerent enemies. Even prior to his nomination as the Democratic candidate for the presidency, my distrust of this man was proprioceptive. And after his Missouri address, I wondered why anyone would want to “fundamentally transform” a country which, for all its flaws, perched atop the pinnacle of success in comparison to any other country.

Everything Obama has done since then has only served to confirm what was originally a deep suspicion and soon grew to become a complete certainty. Dozens of meticulously researched books have been published to the same effect. And yet very few people seemed to be paying attention. No less disconcerting, those who argue that to criticize Obama is a sign of deep-dyed racism are, of course, relying on slander and misappropriation of language to protect their chosen standard bearer and his Marxist/progressivist/utopian project.

What will it take to convince the ersatz aristocracy of frivolous intellectuals and brainless celebrities, partisan journalists, editors and academics, and an indifferent or deluded laity that they are heading for a crisis that will change our lives immeasurably for the worse? The evidence is beyond dispute.

America is drowning in a state of unredeemable debt — $17 trillion in actual debt and, according to economic historian Niall Ferguson, in the vicinity of $200 trillion in unfunded liabilities [2], while one in five households [3] depends on food stamps. At the same time, it is printing money like there’s no tomorrow — and there may not be — while subsidizing green energy fiascos at enormous cost to the taxpayer ($90 billion [4] in wasted stimulus funds, and counting). It finds itself in the throes of a metastasizing race war, caused in no small degree by the president’s rhetoric and behavior and fomented by his attorney general. It is a country increasingly governed by executive fiat and by an administration rocked by a near-endless gyre of political and ideological scandals. It is a country whose federal government opposes voter ID, opening the door to electoral corruption. It is a country that spies [5] on its own citizens, software corporations and web search engines, tries avowed terrorists in civilian courts, allows its ambassador and his entourage to be killed, without reprisal, and suffers its higher echelons to be riddled with Muslim Brotherhood operatives, giving the impression of a College of mujtahids. They are the advance cohort. “Today,” writes Larry Kelley in his sobering book Lessons from Fallen Civilizations [6], “millions of militant Muslims awake every morning plotting the destruction of the US. Many are among us.” And there will be more, if these [7] reports [8] of fast-tracking the citizenship applications of large numbers of Muslim immigrants are reliable, as they appear to be.

It is a country whose president purges its military — 197 senior officers, including nine commanding generals [9] — as did Turkey’s autocratic leader Recep Tayyip Erdogan to ensure the continuity of his regime. It is a country that refuses to defend its borders, even suing to keep them as porous as possible. It is a country shifting precipitously to the Left, now mired in the exorbitant socialist travesty of Obamacare built on an ascending pyramid of lies and false enrollment numbers [10] — or in the words of L.A. County Deputy District Attorney Patrick Frey at his Patterico blog [11], “they’re not just lying about politics now. They’re lying about data. They’re lying about everything. All the time. Constantly. It’s what you have to do to prop up an unsustainable government. … You lie and lie and lie and lie and lie and lie and lie.”

It is a country whose domestic agenda is predicated on the Marxist principle of redistributive economics that amounts to stealing from the productive class to maintain an ever-growing parasitical constituency. It is a country at war with honest science, transmuting NASA into a program for Muslim outreach [12] and buying into the Gore/Hansen/Mann-inflated, IPCC climate scam. It is a country that is retreating on every front and that has lost the Middle East [13] as well as the respect of its adversaries[14]. It is a country that betrays its allies and endangers the world in the process, as in the phony, eagerly sought agreement that allows a self-described genocidal and nuclearizing Iran to keep spinning its centrifuges while profiting from relaxed sanctions. It is a country whose administration has sold its loyal partner, Israel, down the Jordan River.

“The United States is no longer a rational nation,” mourns [15] James Lewis. “Under Obama we are burning our traditional allies, and since weakness brings aggression, Iran is now empowered, China is grabbing ocean territory for shale deposits, and the worst offenders against women’s rights are now elected to the UN Human Rights Commission.” It is hard to contend with his summation.

All this proceeds under the direction of a president who has sealed his vital documents so that very little of crucial importance is known about him.

Read more at PJ Media

Senior DHS Adviser Elibiary: Brotherhood Not a Threat in U.S.

Elibiary2By Ryan Mauro:

Controversial Department. of Homeland Security adviser Mohamed Elibiary recently said on Twitter that former Egyptian President Morsi, a Muslim Brotherhood leader, is “Egypt’s Mandela,” referring to the famous former President of South Africa that dismantled its racist apartheid system.

Morsi, who promised to be a president for all Egyptians, was ousted after over 30 million Egyptians demonstrated against him for unprecedented power grabshuman rights abuses (including appointing a former terrorist leader as governor of Luxor) and pushing through a sharia constitution for Egypt.

Elibiary, who is now a senior Homeland Security adviser, is a Muslim activist that led the now-defunct Freedom and Justice Foundation. He has spent years as a Texas Republican Party official and was a delegate for Senator McCain in 2008. The Obama Administration placed him on the Homeland Security Advisory Council and promoted him in September.

Elibiary also served on the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism Working Group and the Faith-based Security and Communications Advisory Committee.

Elibiary was the subject of a damning 37-page report put together by the Clarion Project and other anti-Islamist organizations that included an extensive interview with him. Clarion has a summary of 15 disturbing facts from the report.

In an October 22 tweet, Elibiary praises Morsi as a hero on par with Nelson Mandela:

Until today, Elibiary remains adamant that the Muslim Brotherhood is still the most popular party in Egypt, even though the majority of Egyptians support banning the Brotherhood as a political party.

Read more at Clarion Project

Bombing Attempt at Jacksonville International Airport: Terrorism or Immigration Problem?

Zeliko Causevic

Zeliko Causevic

By Jerry Gordon and Randy McDaniels

Zeliko Causevic, a registered Democrat, has been confirmed to be a refugee from Bosnia. It is not yet confirmed if he shares the same Islamic ideology of Bosnian extremist Sami Osmakac, who attempted a bombing in Tampa, FL in January 2012, or the Tsarnev brothers who were able to successfully complete their terror plot by bombing the Boston Marathon bombing earlier this year. In July 2013, federal prosecutors charged Edin Sakoc, a Bosnian Muslim living in Vermont, with lying to U.S. immigration officials about his involvement in war crimes.

The vast majority Bosnian’s flooding into America share the Islamic faith.  According to Baylor University ”virtually all Bosnian refugees are Muslim”. All of the 200,000 Bosnian refugees who immigrated to the United States are Muslim. There is a Sunni Muslim community of Bosniaks in Jacksonville directed by Ejub Zejnic.

Considering the fact that many of these Muslims have personally experience a literal clash of civilizations during the recent religiously motivated wars between Bosnia, Serbia, and Croatia … it would be reasonable to assume they would have a higher propensity toward a more radical strain of Islam and violence.

The United States in an effort to make up for what some considered an unfair immigration policy for decades in relation to countries of the Middle East and other state sponsors of terror, were ultimately successful in changing immigration policy in an effort to right this perceived wrong.

Right or wrong, these experiments in social justice over national security are have not fared well for the American people who have seen the emergence of a new phenomenon…. home grown terrorism by individuals who almost without exception embrace the Islamic faith.

Read more at Watchdog Wire