Time for political elites to stand up to sharia

AP Photo | Francois Mori

AP Photo | Francois Mori

Conservative Review, by Daniel Horowitz, July 15, 016:

Our political class, which includes both parties, spent an entire month debating gun control and turning a blind eye to the combatants behind those guns and how we have willfully allowed them into our country and have promoted their Muslim Brotherhood lobbyists at the highest levels of government. Last night, in Nice, France, a Tunisian-Muslim immigrant murdered 84 people in a Jihad attack that mainly involved a truck. He also reportedly got out of the car, shouted “Allah Akbar,” and began shooting into the crowd with a firearm he took from the truck, which was loaded with grenades and firearms. France has stricter gun laws than even what Democrats [publicly] want implemented in our country, yet they are suffering even more at the hands of Islamic jihad. What will it take to end the willful blindness on the part of political elites?

The willful blindness of sharia-based Islam – the glue that binds together all jihadists – is endemic of both political parties. Here is the preamble of the “counter-terrorism” legislation Republicans wanted to pass before conservatives rebelled against the effort:

The preeminent terrorist threats to the United States are radical Islamist terrorist networks such as al Qaeda, the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, and their allies and affiliate networks, as well as lone-wolf supporters and sympathizers in the United States and around the world.

 

This is beyond tone-deaf. It’s willful blindness. The Islamic State was created in 2013, long after the modern era of Islamic jihad. We are not at war with networks or tactics; there is a clash of civilization and it is rooted in Sharia-Islam and the dictates of the Hadith, as practiced by millions of Muslims and rooted in a number of nation-states from Iran to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and even the government we established in Afghanistan. It is that motivation that has inspired so many Muslims living in the West to either support jihad or, worse, actually pursue it.

Our contemporary guiding principle is to admit anyone and everyone – in large numbers over short periods of time – from cultures that clash with ours unless they have a card identifying them up front as a member of a known terror group.

Western leaders have always sought to isolate and decompartmentalize the problem. The jihadists in the Caucuses were “Chechnyians,” the savages in Israel were “Palestinians.” The West sought to legitimize and validate their grievances as rooted in geographical political disputes. In fact, they were all rooted in Jihad as dictated by the Hadith. The West blamed Israel for suffering from suicide bombings and vehicular attacks for years. Tragically, we now see that those tactics have made their way to the West – tactics employed by the same enemy with the same ideology.

This willful blindness of focusing myopically on ISIS and Al Qaeda while downright promoting the Islamic supremacist ideology behind it affects our immigration, homeland security, and national security/military policies. For if we are unwilling to acknowledge the enemy and its threatening doctrine, we will pursue dyslexic policies in those three realms.

It is this willful blindness that has led CIA Director John Brennan to conclude this week that “Saudi Arabia is among our closest counterterrorism partners.”

It is this willful blindness that has allowed our military leadership to throw our soldiers into Islamic civil wars to fight one sharia-adherent group of Muslims on behalf of other sharia-adherent Muslims, while shunning true reformist leaders in places like Egypt and Libya who would actually fight Islamic supremacism.

It is this willful blindness that has allowed Islamic supremacist groups with ties to Hamas to become the leaders of American Muslims, obtain security clearances and meet with Congress 325 times in one year.

It is this willful blindness that has allowed countries like France to bring in hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Middle East who subscribe to the underlying ideology shared by Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, the Nice terrorist. And it is this appalling willful blindness that has caused our political leaders to learn nothing from the mistakes of Europe and instead, follow blindly in their footsteps.

What paves the road for endless numbers of Muslims in the West who make the ultimate decision to engage in violent Jihad is the climate of civilization jihad that is rooted in the mosques, schools, and political organizations, mainly run by Muslim Brotherhood groups. The notion that we would allow more individuals into our country who subscribe to this ideology is maniacal and suicidal. There are certainly no constitutional mandates on prospectively bringing in any group of immigrants, and as I explore in two chapters of Stolen Sovereignty, our Founders and early political leaders up until just two generations ago all agreed to only admit those who completely shared our political values. This was the essence of Teddy Roosevelt’s message right before he passed away:

But this is predicated upon the man’s becoming in very fact an American and nothing but an American. If he tries to keep segregated with men of his own origin and separated from the rest of America, then he isn’t doing his part as an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. . . .We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language, for we intend to see that the crucible turns our people out as Americans, of American nationality, and not as dwellers in a polyglot boarding-house; and we have room for but one soul loyalty, and that is loyalty to the American people.

 

The guiding principle of our immigration policy was to only admit those who unquestionably adhered to our values system. Our contemporary guiding principle is to admit anyone and everyone – in large numbers over short periods of time – from cultures that clash with ours unless they have a card identifying them up front as a member of a known terror group. When our early political leaders in both parties promoted policies that weeded out those immigrants who didn’t share our values, they were dealing with Europeans from Western Civilization. They could have never imagined an ideology that is the complete antithesis of constitutional republicanism being invited in and championed by the political elites on such a large scale. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson, who was the famed Nuremberg prosecutor, best encapsulated the incompatibility of Sharia with western civilization in a statement published in 1955:

In any broad sense, Islamic Law offers the American lawyer a study in dramatic contrasts. Even casual acquaintance and superficial knowledge — all that most of us at bench or bar will be able to acquire — reveal that its striking features relative to our law are not likenesses but inconsistencies, not similarities but contrarieties. In its source, its scope and its sanctions, the law [i.e., Islamic Law, Sharia] of the Middle East is the antithesis of Western Law…Islamic law, on the contrary, finds its chief source in the will of Allah as revealed to the Prophet Muhammad. It contemplates one community of the faithful, though they may be of various tribes and in widely separated locations. Religion, not nationalism or geography, is the proper cohesive force. The state itself is subordinate to the Qur’an, which leaves little room for additional legislation, none for criticism or dissent. This world is viewed as but the vestibule to another and a better one for the faithful, and the Qur’an lays down rules of behavior towards others and toward society to assure a safe transition. It is not possible to separate political or juristic theories from the teachings of the Prophet, which establish rules of conduct concerning religious, domestic, social, and political life. This results in a law of duties, rather than rights…

 

In the irony of all ironies, this very statement from Justice Jackson has been purged from our counterterrorism training for federal law enforcement, at the behest of the Muslim Brotherhood’s CVE agenda.

As it states in the Bible, the truth is not in the heaven or in a far off land; it “is very close to you; it is in your mouth and in your heart, so that you can fulfill it [Deuteronomy 30:14].  We don’t need to conjure up unconstitutional or novel ideas or focus on trucks, guns, and tactics in order to secure this nation. We need to simply recognize the incontrovertible truth and employ basic common sense and stop self-immolating.

cr audio

Newt livechat on Nice

Obama Admin Ignored Evidence of Dallas Shooter’s Membership in New Black Panthers

But Obama said the cop killer’s motive was “hard to untangle”…

Truth Revolt, July 11, 2016:

In an interview with Judge Jeanine Pirro on Fox News, election lawyer J. Christian Adams discusses his article on PJ Media titled “Obama Justice Department Laughed Off Armed New Black Panther Threat,” regarding the Dallas cop killer Micah Johnson and his involvement in the radical New Black Panther organization.

Here is Adams summing up the info in his must-read piece:

Micah Johnson, the shooter in Dallas who ambushed Dallas police officers, was a member of the New Black Panther Party. He was active in the Houston Chapter of the NBPP. The Houston New Black Panthers were caught on video marching with semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, chanting “off the pig” and “oink oink bang bang.” One of the individuals in that march bears a striking resemblance to Dallas shooter Johnson.

The New Black Panthers are a rabid anti-white and anti-Semitic group. They were defendants in a voter intimidation case brought in 2009 by the United States Department of Justice for stalking a polling place with a weapon in the 2008 election. After the inauguration, and after DOJ lawyers obtained a default against them in court, the Obama Justice Department dismissed the case.

During that case, Justice Department lawyers discovered evidence that the New Black Panthers had produced a video called “Training Day” which urges members to ambush and kill police officers using AK-47s. This evidence was brought to the attention of top Justice Department officials, including then-Assistant Attorney General (and now Labor Secretary and possible Vice Presidential nominee) Tom Perez. It was brought to the attention of multiple Justice Department officials. Not a single one took the video seriously, instead laughing it off as the work of a couple of cranks and kooks.

Other photos were found in which Black Panthers pose with firearms — illegally because they are convicted felons. Nobody did anything about those photos either. Nobody was ever arrested for breaking federal law. The lawyers working the voter intimidation case took the video threats to kill very, very seriously and urged Obama administration officials to do the same. They didn’t. Now we learn what happens when black radicals intent on killing white cops are given signals that their behavior will not be checked – either legally or rhetorically.

Watch the video above and check out Breitbart here for further info on Johnson’s New Black Panther involvement.

***

Also  see:

Is this the Dallas cop killer at a New Black Panthers march?

Is this the Dallas cop killer at a New Black Panthers march?

***

FBI: ‘Hostile Actors’ Likely Hacked Clinton Email Secrets

AP

AP

Washington Free Beacon, by Bill Gertz, July 6, 2016:

An extensive FBI investigation found evidence that foreign government hackers accessed private emails sent by former secretary of state Hillary Clinton but no direct evidence spies hacked into the several unsecure servers she used.

FBI Director James Comey revealed Tuesday the 11-month probe into Clinton’s private email servers uncovered negligent handling of very sensitive classified information that was placed on several unsecure servers between 2009 and 2013, when Clinton served as secretary of state.

In an unusual public announcement, Comey outlined findings that included discovery of highly classified information sent and received on Clinton’s private email servers, and signs that “hostile actors” gained access to email accounts of people who were sharing emails with Clinton.

Comey said no clear evidence was found that Clinton and her aides intended to violate laws but “there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”

Despite the evidence of potential criminal wrongdoing regarding communicating top secret, secret, and confidential information in emails, Comey announced at FBI headquarters that he is not recommending Justice Department prosecution of the presumptive Democratic nominee for president.

“Although there is evidence of potential violation of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case,” Comey said.

The decision drew fire from Donald Trump, the likely Republican presidential nominee. “FBI director said Crooked Hillary compromised our national security,” he stated on Twitter. “No charges. Wow!” Trump added that the “system is rigged” since Gen. David Petraeus, a former CIA director, “got in trouble for less. Very very unfair.”

Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon praised the FBI announcement.

“As the secretary has long said, it was a mistake to use her personal email and she would not do it again. We are glad that this matter is now resolved,” Fallon said.

On the foreign counterintelligence aspects of the case, Comey said investigators found no “direct evidence” foreign state hackers gained access to the private email system. Advanced state cyber attackers, however, would be unlikely to leave traces of such intrusions, he added.

“We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account,” Comey said, without elaborating or identifying the people in question.

During foreign travel, Clinton also used the personal email system extensively on “the territory of sophisticated adversaries,” likely a reference to China and Russia.

“Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account,” Comey said.

Former CIA director Michael Hayden, commenting on Comey’s remarks, said Clinton’s use of private email servers highlights the danger posed by the use of such servers, noting he believes it is very likely foreign states hacked into her server.

“I would lose respect for any serious intelligence agency on this planet if they had not accessed the emails on the server,” said Hayden, also a former director of the NSA.

According to Comey, seven email “chains” examined by the FBI contained classified information labeled “top secret, special access program,” among the highest security classification levels.

Special access programs are used in government to protect extremely sensitive information requiring extraordinary security measures. They can include such things as the identity of clandestine human agents or secret intelligence operations, military operations, or the characteristics of electronics used by foreign radar systems.

“Those chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending emails about those matters and receiving emails about those same matters,” Comey said.

“There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”

A small number of the emails contained markings indicating the presence of classified information, Comey said.

That contradicts Clinton’s repeated statements that she did not misuse any information marked as classified data. The campaign website also contains the statement that “no information in Clinton’s emails was marked classified at the time she sent or received them.”

Comey said even if the data was not marked as classified “participants who know, or should know, that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.”

Michelle Van Cleave, former national counterintelligence executive, said she was surprised that the FBI announcement did not address whether federal Records Act violations occurred, or whether evidence was found of corruption involving improper actions by Clinton to support the Clinton Foundation.

“Is the FBI’s investigation into those matter still ongoing?” she asked.

On the foreign intelligence targeting of the Clinton emails, Van Cleave said there is no question the former secretary of state knew her email messages were and are targeted by spy services.

“The working assumption of the intelligence community is that they have it all and damage assessments are still underway,” Van Cleave said. “She simplified their job by neatly packaging all of her email out of the hands of government security personnel. If that isn’t an open-and-shut case of ‘gross negligence’ under the espionage laws I don’t know what is.”

Van Cleave said she is concerned by the precedent of not prosecuting a former senior government official who mishandled classified information. “If government workers see their leaders play fast and loose with classified information with impunity, what is the incentive for them to behave differently,” she said.

The FBI announcement comes just over a week after former President Bill Clinton met with Attorney General Loretta Lynch in Phoenix, raising charges of political interference in the investigation. Lynch was appointed U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York by Clinton in 1999.

President Obama also appeared to interfere with the investigation by announcing in October that “I can tell you this is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”

Kenneth E. deGraffenreid, former White House National Security Council staff intelligence director, said the FBI’s decision not to recommend prosecution is a case of politicization. “The Bureau is indelibly stained by this blatantly political act,” deGraffenreid said. “What would have happened to any other government official?”

DeGraffenreid said Comey overstepped FBI authority by asserting that “no reasonable prosecutor” would bring a case against Clinton. “He is not a prosecutor,” he said. “That is the attorney general’s job. Not Comey’s.”

The Justice Department’s National Security Division now must decide whether to follow the FBI recommendation or prosecute Clinton, who spent three and a half hours last weekend undergoing questioning by FBI agents.

Analysts say the Justice Department has been politicized through liberal appointees and thus is unlikely to go against the FBI recommendation.

The FBI announcement clears the way for Clinton to gain the Democratic nomination for president later this month at the party’s convention in Philadelphia.

Comey, in an unusually detailed statement regarding a criminal investigation, announced that his recommendation was not cleared in advance with the Justice Department and was more detailed than usual “because I think the American people deserve those details in a case of intense public interest.”

The FBI investigation was launched in August of 2015 following a July 24, 2015, referral from the inspectors general of the State Department and Intelligence Community. The notice said classified information may exist on at least one server and a thumb drive.

The FBI director also faulted what he said was a lax security culture at the State Department regarding the care and handling of classified information.

Comey said the probe examined if classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on a personal system in violation of laws that make it a felony to mishandle classified information intentionally or in a grossly negligent way. A second law makes it a misdemeanor to remove classified information from secure systems.

The FBI found Clinton used not one but several servers and numerous mobile devices to read personal emails.

From the 30,000 emails Clinton gave to the State Department, the FBI found 110 emails that contained classified information at the time they were sent, including eight emails with top secret data, 36 with secret information, and eight with less-sensitive confidential data, Comey said.

Some 2,000 additional emails were later re-classified to “confidential.”

“The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related emails that were not among the group of 30,000 emails returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014,” Comey said, noting the emails were found from deleted emails and traces on servers and devices.

Comey said no evidence was uncovered indicating Clinton deleted emails containing classified information an in effort to cover up a crime.

But he added: “None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.

“But their presence is especially concerning because all of the emails were housed on unclassified personal servers, not even supported by full-time security staff like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government or even with a commercial email service like Gmail,” Comey said.

Based on factors such as strength of evidence, criminal intent, and how similar situations of mishandling or removing classified data were handled in the past, “we cannot find a case that would support bringing criminal charges on these facts,” he added.

Comey said the announcement would trigger public debate but insisted the probe was done “honestly, confidently, and independently.”

“Criminal intent aside, anyone experienced in these matters knows that the real sin here was the original sin,” said Hayden, the former CIA director who noted that that the initial creation of the private server without security procedures was a major vulnerability.

“[It meant] bad things with regard to preserving federal records and really bad things with regard to security,” he said.

***

Hillary Clinton can be blackmailed 

FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook

l1MaMIlkPoh1MRvphR7Lujl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9National Review, by Andrew C. McCarthy — July 5, 2016

Stop Importing Jihadists- A Policy Prescription

1949093373

Center for Security Policy, June 28, 2016:

The danger posed by the Global Jihad is immediate and deadly and our government should take all possible precautions to keep Americans safe. The Center for Security Policy (CSP) released the Secure Freedom Strategy to Defeat the Global Jihad Movement to provide an approach that uses all aspects of U.S. power to stop this growing danger to our way of life. There are many facets to the threat, but one of the most compelling is the entry to this country of Sharia Supremacists who work to place their totalitarian ideology above any man-made law including the U.S. Constitution.

The existing immigration laws provide ample authority to ban sharia-adherent individuals under exclusions for totalitarian ideology and the President should provide guidance to the responsible agencies to do so. CSP has produced a white paper detailing the rationale and legal basis for this policy in the following white paper:

Stop Importing Jihadists: Making Sharia-Supremacism a Bar to Immigration and Naturalization

Stop Importing Jihadists- Executive Summary

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE                                                                     27 June 2016      

NEW POLL FINDS AMERICANS WANT TO STOP IMPORTING JIHADISTS, CENTER OFFERS PLAN FOR ACCOMPLISHING THAT SECURITY GOAL

Washington, D.C.: A new poll suggests that large majorities of Americans agree with the common sense proposition that we should stop importing jihadists. A murderous attack in Orlando heightened concern that we already have too many here.

A public opinion survey conducted this month by Opinion Savvy found that 71% of respondents support “identifying foreign supporters of Sharia law prior to their admission to the United States.” Of those favoring such identification, 80% believe Sharia-supremacists should not be admitted into the country.

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump put this issue on the political map last year by calling for a temporary pause in admissions of Muslims until a way can be found to determine whether they are potential terrorists. He cited troubling findings of a 2015 poll of U.S. Muslims conducted for the Center for Security Policy. Twenty-five percent of respondents believed “violence against Americans here in the United States could be justified as part of the global jihad” and fifty-one percent believed “Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed by [Islam’s totalitarian] Sharia” code, rather than the Constitution.

In recent days, Mr. Trump has mused publicly about how to differentiate between would-be Muslim immigrants who pose a threat and those who do not. He has suggested applying his proposed restriction to all would-be immigrants from certain countries tied to terrorism.

One of Mr. Trump’s top advisors, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, however, argues that defining test should instead be adherence to Sharia. On Fox News Sunday, Speaker Gingrich said: “I would apply a test for Sharia and a test for loyalty to ISIS rather than geographic test, because we’re fighting people all over the world who are dangerous to us. So, it’s hard to say which countries really are the Islamic terrorist countries.”

In an appearance last Thursday on Fox News, Center Executive Vice President Jim Hanson made a similar point:

It would be smart right now to pause immigration from jihadist controlled or influenced areas and take a look at whether or not letting anyone who is Sharia adherent Muslim— which is a totalitarian ideology not the religion — has any business coming in this country ever. We can ban totalitarian ideologues from entry with existing laws. And it’s probably  time to do that and stop bringing in more jihadists into the United States….

…The Sharia adherence is the important thing. It’s not all Muslims. There are plenty of Muslims willing to live in peace. But the ones who follow Sharia, which is a large number, it’s a third to half worldwide, have no way to follow the Constitution because they’re required to place that above any man-made law. So they’re not going assimilate. It’s not a question of their parents or internet or ISIS or anything. That’s what they taught and that is what they follow. That leads them to jihad and leads to dead bodies. We got to stop it.

The Center for Security Policy released today a white paper describing how such a filter could be applied and statutory changes that would facilitate its implementation:

“Stop Importing Jihadists: Making Sharia-Supremacism a Bar to Immigration and Naturalization.”

It calls on presidential contenders, candidates for other offices, elected officials and citizens of this country to evaluate and implement this important paper’s recommendations.

For more information contact:                                                                                               

Alex Vanness

vanness@securefreedom.org

The Security Firm That Employed the Orlando Shooter Protects American Nuclear Facilities

How could the world’s largest private security firm employ an armed guard who, for almost a decade,angrily and openly threatened to commit mass murder? COURTESY YOUTUBE

How could the world’s largest private security firm employ an armed guard who, for almost a decade,angrily and openly threatened to commit mass murder?
COURTESY YOUTUBE

The New Yorker, by Eric Schlosser, June 27, 2016:

Omar Mateen, the killer responsible for the carnage at the Pulse night club in Orlando, two weeks ago, began training to become a corrections officer during the fall of 2006. He worked at a prison in Indiantown, Florida, while attending a correctional academy at a community college. His training didn’t last long. In April, 2007, the Florida Department of Corrections “administratively dismissed” Mateen, and he was kicked out of the academy. Mateen had felt slighted for being a Muslim, warned that a massacre like the one at Virginia Tech could occur at the academy, and talked about shooting his classmates at a school cookout. Administrators worried that he might show up on campus with a gun. Five months later, he was hired by G4S Secure Solutions USA, Inc., to work as an armed security guard. He obtained a license to carry a concealed weapon and, over the years, fulfilled various assignments for the company. At the St. Lucie County Courthouse, where G4S had a contract, one of Mateen’s tasks was screening visitors for guns.

In the aftermath of the Orlando killings, many questions remain unanswered—about the role that religious extremism played in the crime, the mix of personal despair and political ideology that motivated the killer, the efficacy of gun-control laws to prevent such violence, the competence of the F.B.I. in recent anti-terrorism investigations. And there is also the question of how G4S, the world’s largest private security firm, could have employed an armed guard who, for almost a decade, angrily and openly threatened to commit mass murder.

In 2013, other G4S guards at the St. Lucie courthouse warned their supervisor that Mateen had made sexist, racist, and anti-Semitic remarks; that he’d praised Nidal Hasan, the U.S. Army major and self-proclaimed “Soldier of Allah” who shot forty-five people at Fort Hood; that Mateen had claimed connections to members of Al Qaeda and Hezbollah and the brothers responsible for the Boston Marathon bombings; and that he’d expressed the wish to die as a martyr. Mateen had also threatened a deputy sheriff. “Omar became very agitated and made a comment that he could have Al Qaeda kill my employee and his family,” Sheriff Ken Mascara later explained. The sheriff’s office notified the F.B.I., and the courthouse supervisor asked G4S to remove Mateen from his post at the courthouse immediately. Instead of firing him, G4S merely transferred him. For the next year, while on a terrorist watch list and under investigation by the F.B.I., Mateen retained his Florida license to carry a gun and worked as a security guard at P.G.A. Village, a golf resort. Daniel Gilroy, a former police officer who worked with him at the resort, told Florida Today that G4S had been warned that Mateen was homophobic and potentially dangerous. His unsettling behavior prompted Gilroy to leave G4S. “I quit because everything he said was toxic,” Gilroy said. “And the company wouldn’t do anything. This guy was unhinged and unstable. He talked about killing people.” And then he did.

Read more

DHS whistleblower to testify at Senate hearing on ‘willful blindness’

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif.

WND, June 27, 2916:

The Justice Department’s decision one week ago to scrub references to Islam from the transcript of the 9-1-1 call in which Orlando killer Omar Mateen declared his allegiance to ISIS before murdering 49 people had a familiar ring to Philip Haney.

It’s why a Senate subcommittee with some of the chamber’s biggest names – including Dianne Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, chairman Ted Cruz, Charles Grassley, Lindsey Graham and Jeff Sessions – will hear Haney testify Tuesday afternoon.

The title of the hearing scheduled for 2:30 p.m. Eastern Time is “Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts To Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism.”

The senators will hear Haney tell what he witnessed as a founding member of the Department of Homeland Security who suffered repeated retaliation because his intelligence gathering and analysis of Muslim networks in the United States clashed with the administration’s politically correct policies.

Haney’s story, recounted in his new book, “See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad,” has direct relevance to the Orlando attack.

Much as the transcript of Omar Mateen’s call was scrubbed of his Islamic motive, a case Haney helped develop as a member of one of the National Targeting Center’s advanced units was shut down by Hillary Clinton’s State Department and the DHS Office of Civil Rights and Civil Liberties out of concern for the “rights” of foreign Muslims.

The intelligence, however, had been used to connect members of the movement to several terrorist organizations and financing at the highest levels, including for Hamas and al-Qaida. And after Haney retired honorably last year, he discovered that had his case continued, it might have prevented both the Orlando and the San Bernardino attacks.

Along with the quashing of the case in June 2012, the administration subsequently ordered the deletion of an additional 67 records concerning a related network.

Haney has explained that this kind of information comprises the “dots” that counter-terrorism analysts connect to form cases that are used to identify potential terrorist threats.

DHS agent Philip Haney’s blockbuster revelations of the federal government’s appeasement of supremacist Islam are told in his new book “See Something Say Nothing.”

Other members of the committee that will convene Tuesday – the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts – are Republican Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah, Jeff Flake of Arizona, Mike Lee of Utah, David Vitter of Louisiana and Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, ranking member Chris Coons of Delaware, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut.

‘Modern-day hero’

Two days after the Orlando attack, former Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and current Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, were among the figures who joined Haney at a press conference at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C., to back the former DHS officer and urge that his story gain more visibility to help bring reform to America’s national security.

See the full press conference:

Gohmert has described Haney as “a modern-day hero who did all within his power to protect America from the internal and external threats from jihad.”

See Gohmert’s comments at the National Press Club:

As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, Bachmann relied on Haney’s information and tried to help him gain whistleblower status.

“What Philip’s story is telling us is that we’re going down the wrong road,” Bachmann said in an interview before the press conference. “Innocent Americans have gotten killed by following this false fantasy, delusional view of Islam, that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism.”

Bachmann told reporters in her remarks that Haney did “what we want 100,000 employees to do, to act in accordance with his job description and keep the American people safe.”

See Bachmann speak at National Press Club:

Also speaking on Haney’s behalf was a former top official for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, William Ferri, who had been assigned by DHS authorities to investigate Haney. Haney had been accused of using classified information to write an article about the Hamas network in the United States. Ferri found Haney to be innocent, and later the two of them broke a case together, preventing members of a radical movement that Haney had been tracking from entering the U.S.

See William Ferri at the National Press Club:

Joseph E. Schmitz, a former Defense Department inspector general, told of his legal representation of Haney when the Justice Department impaneled a grand jury to prosecute Haney for allegedly leaking information regarding the Boston Marathon bombing.

Haney was exonerated, and his book reveals the astonishing behind-the-scenes events in the days after the bombing, leading to Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano twice deceiving Congress in hearings on Capitol Hill.

Schmitz, a top foreign-policy adviser for Donald Trump’s campaign who appeared at the press conference on his own behalf, called Haney a “very, very courageous, very smart and dedicated man.”

“At the end of all of our days, we all have to meet our maker and account for our talents,” he said. “And I don’t think Philip Haney – as painful as everything he’s been through – I don’t think he’s going to have to have any problem accounting for his talents.”

See Joseph Schmitz at the National Press Club:

Note: Media wishing to interview the authors of “See Something, Say Nothing” can contact them here.

See a trailer for “See Something, Say Nothing”:

Five Ways Political Correctness Kills Americans

OmarMateen2-640x480

Daily Caller, by Mark Tapson, June  15, 2016:

Political correctness in the federal government protected radical Islamic terrorist Omar Mateen in at least five ways during the months leading up to his deadly assault on a gay nightclub in Orlando, according to a national security expert.

“The fact is that the FBI did recognize Omar Mateen, twice in fact, but as a matter of official policy under the Obama administration’s politically correct ‘countering violent extremism’ policies, the institutional rules of our national security agencies as a matter of intentional design ensure that investigative clues are obscured,” Patrick Poole told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Poole is co-founder of Unconstrained Analytics, non-profit group dedicated to analyzing “evidence unconstrained by preconceptions and biases” concerning international terrorism. He has been a guest lecturer on counter-terrorism issues at the U.S. Army War College and a speaker at the Army Provost Marshal’s annual Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection conference.

  • PC blinds homeland defenders: Among the most controversial of the five factors Poole cited was a 2011 decision by FBI officials to remove from its counter-terrorism training materials references to all terms found objectionable by a team of Muslim experts retained by the Department of Justice. Despite congressional protests, the material was never restored.

As a result, “violent extremist” effectively became the official federal designation for individuals like Mateen, San Bernadino attackers Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook, Boston Marathon bombers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and Fort Hood killer Nidal Malik Hasan, despite their shared devotion to radical Islamic movements, including ISIS and al Qaeda.

Political correctness in the federal government protected radical Islamic terrorist Omar Mateen in at least five ways during the months leading up to his deadly assault on a gay nightclub in Orlando, according to a national security expert.

“The fact is that the FBI did recognize Omar Mateen, twice in fact, but as a matter of official policy under the Obama administration’s politically correct ‘countering violent extremism’ policies, the institutional rules of our national security agencies as a matter of intentional design ensure that investigative clues are obscured,” Patrick Poole told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Poole is co-founder of Unconstrained Analytics, non-profit group dedicated to analyzing “evidence unconstrained by preconceptions and biases” concerning international terrorism. He has been a guest lecturer on counter-terrorism issues at the U.S. Army War College and a speaker at the Army Provost Marshal’s annual Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection conference.

  • PC blinds homeland defenders: Among the most controversial of the five factors Poole cited was a 2011 decision by FBI officials to remove from its counter-terrorism training materials references to all terms found objectionable by a team of Muslim experts retained by the Department of Justice. Despite congressional protests, the material was never restored.

As a result, “violent extremist” effectively became the official federal designation for individuals like Mateen, San Bernadino attackers Tashfeen Malik and Syed Rizwan Farook, Boston Marathon bombers Dzhokhar and Tamerlan Tsarnaev, and Fort Hood killer Nidal Malik Hasan, despite their shared devotion to radical Islamic movements, including ISIS and al Qaeda.

  • PC perverts religious tolerance: The FBI’s head-in-the-sand approach is also seen in a recently completed Department of Homeland Security report that directs federal officials there “not to use any language that might be ‘disrespectful’ to Muslims, including (but not limited to) the words ‘jihad,’ ‘sharia’ and ‘takfir.’” Poole said the policies recommended by the report are in effect throughout the federal government.

Among the federal agencies in DHS are the U.S. Customs and Border Protection agency, U.S. Secret Service, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, U.S. Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration.

  • PC discourages witnesses: The refusal of federal officials to describe terrorist attacks by radical Islamic terrorists accurately also discourages citizens with important information that might prevent deaths and injuries from telling authorities what they know before it’s too late, according to Poole.

The refusal turns “suspicion around on anyone who recognizes the warning signs. When Mateen’s coworkers expressed concern about his extremist statements, the FBI dropped the case because they believed the coworkers, not the future killer, were the problem. The coworkers were deemed racist Islamophobes by the FBI, and Mateen’s behavior and statements were excused,” he told TheDCNF.

“We now have two terrorism cases with dead Americans six months apart, namely San Bernardino and Orlando, where potential witnesses did not report suspicious activity because they were afraid of being called racists and bigots,” Poole added.

  • PC gives cover to terrorist allies: Too often “dialogue” between federal officials and Muslim advocacy groups make it possible for organizations with confirmed terrorist links to influence government policy. Poole pointed to multiple meetings between Department of Justice officials and representatives of the Council for American-Islamic Relations in 2012.

Poole noted that “the FBI and DOJ responded by officially cutting ties with CAIR, but these same agencies regularly disregarded their own rules about engaging these extremist groups with a wink and a nod by the White House.”

  • PC hamstrings Congress: Poole pointed to controversial hearings convened in 2011 by Rep. Peter King, the New York Republican, focused radical Islamization among young American Muslims. King was subjected to relentless and often savage criticism in the media, often based on comments from individuals and groups with links to terrorist ties.

“The politicians on the Hill and elsewhere saw exactly what happened to Peter King when he tried tackle this issue head-on,” Poole told TheDCNF, adding that “these counter-terrorism failures will continue to occur” as long as long as Congress avoids taking decisive budget and legislative actions to end PC-based policies.

Follow Mark on Twitter

How Islamic terrorists infiltrate U.S. airport security

Yusuf Abdi Ali, a Somali Muslim and suspected war criminal, was deported from Canada and given refuge in the U.S., where he worked as a security guard at one of the nation’s busiest airports. (Credit: CBC)

Yusuf Abdi Ali, a Somali Muslim and suspected war criminal, was deported from Canada and given refuge in the U.S., where he worked as a security guard at one of the nation’s busiest airports. (Credit: CBC)

Booted from Canada, Somali ‘war criminal’ finds new ‘rights’ in America

WND, by Leo Hohmann, June  3, 2016:

The fact that a Somali Muslim war criminal booted from Canada could somehow land a job at Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C., appears shocking on its face – but at least six dozen other employees with suspected terror links have been caught working at U.S. airports.

A CNN investigation found that Yusuf Abdi Ali, who is accused of committing atrocities while he was a military commander during Somalia’s civil war, has been living a quiet suburban life in posh Alexandria, Virginia, for about 20 years, CNN reported.

He was deported from Canada after that country found out about his past. But he found refuge in the U.S., which gave him a visa based on his marriage to a Somali-American woman who claimed to be a refugee fleeing war in Somalia. But even that claim turned out to be bogus, as the woman had falsified her refugee application. Still, nothing has been done to remove either Ali or his wife from the U.S.

Watch CNN report on Somali war criminal employed as security guard at Dulles International Airport in Washington, D.C.

As shocking as it may sound, this is not the first incidence of an immigrant with ties to Islamic terrorism or other crimes working at an airport in America.

Documents obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request in March reveal 73 people employed by major airlines at 40 airports nationwide were flagged for potential ties to terrorism.

Terrorism-linked employees have also been flagged at Boston’s Logan International Airport, Seattle’s Sea Tac Airport, Denver International Airport, Honolulu International Airport, Dallas Love Field, San Francisco International Airport, and Los Angeles International Airport, among others.

These employees were not properly vetted because the TSA said it did not have full access to terrorist databases during their hiring, according to an Inspector General’s report.

“Without complete and accurate information, TSA risks credentialing and providing unescorted access to secure airport areas for workers with potential to harm the nation’s air transportation system,” the report found.

In 2014, three Somali “refugees” with ties to either ISIS and/or al-Shabab were arrested after it was discovered they had plans to travel overseas and fight with the terrorist organizations. All three had security clearances for jobs at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport that allowed them to go into areas travelers were not allowed, Fox 9 reported.

Read more

Also see:

How EmailGate Weakened America’s National Security

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Photo: Eric Thayer/Getty Images)

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. (Photo: Eric Thayer/Getty Images)

It’s safe to say that Moscow, Beijing and Tehran know a lot more about Hillary Clinton than the American public does

Observer, by John R. Schindler, June 1, 2016:

Last week’s devastating report by the State Department Inspector General has made it plain to all who wish to see that Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state, violated numerous regulations pertaining to federal records and cybersecurity, then lied effusively about it to the public.

That State IG assessment has left Clinton’s defenders without much of a leg to stand on if they want an honest, fact-based defense of her actions in EmailGate. Therefore, Team Clinton has resorted to their customary deceptions and dissimulations, buttressed by legalisms designed to obscure truths rather than reveal them.

Here we have Lanny Davis, a top Clinton consigliere for more than two decades, explaining how Hillary is innocent of any wrongdoing, citing five allegedly “indisputable” facts. Then follows the customary litany, cited by her defenders whenever EmailGate comes up. This was legal. Besides, everybody does it. Plus nothing was “labeled” classified at the time it appeared in Ms. Clinton’s private email. To those acquainted with Clintonspeak, the only thing missing is a discussion of the meaning of “is.”

Mr. Davis’ most interesting claim is his assertion that “there is no evidence that Clinton’s private server was ever successfully hacked… all the dire and dark warnings from partisan Republicans about the secretary of state risking the nation’s security by using a private server are, in fact, all speculation—based on no facts whatsoever.”

This is deception of a special kind. In the first place, why has the Romanian hacker Guccifer pleaded guilty to hacking into Hillary’s server if he did not, in fact, do so? Moreover, the FBI has been in possession of said server for months, and they have uncovered several successful hacking efforts into it when it resided in an upstairs bathroom of the Clinton residence in Chappaqua, New York.

“We know it was hacked numerous times, it’s that simple,” explained a senior U.S. counterintelligence official who is privy some of the FBI’s findings. “If I were Vladimir Putin I’d fire the head of the SVR [Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service] if he didn’t get a good look at Hillary’s emails when they were sitting in plain sight online,” he added with a laugh.

Here, Mr. Davis is hiding behind the fact that the FBI has not yet released the findings of its investigation into EmailGate to the public. Until they do, there is indeed “no evidence” of  foreign intelligence services accessing Ms. Clinton’s emails—since the FBI considers that evidence classified until it is deemed fit to be publicly released. This is how the classification rules that Hillary and her staff so assiduously ignored actually work.

In their customary fashion, Team Clinton is pushing back with a touch of cheek. Ms. Clinton now plans a serious effort to sell herself as the better national security candidate than Donald Trump, based on her tenure of secretary of state. While there is no denying Mr. Trump is a national security neophyte who seems unacquainted with some of the basic lingo of that field, he is not under FBI investigation for espionage and political corruption.

Read more

John Schindler is a security expert and former National Security Agency analyst and counterintelligence officer. A specialist in espionage and terrorism, he’s also been a Navy officer and a War College professor. He’s published four books and is on Twitter at @20committee.

Frank Gaffney: Saudis Waging ‘Economic Warfare’ Against U.S., Attack on Fracking Industry Was a ‘Hostile Action’

Andrew Burton/Getty Images

Andrew Burton/Getty Images

Breitbart, by John Hayward, April 20, 2016:

Center for Security Policy founder Frank Gaffney, a senior policy adviser for presidential candidate Sen. Ted Cruz, tells Stephen K. Bannon on Breitbart News Daily the importance of national security issues in the 2016 presidential race.

He also addressed the controversy over the release of intelligence pertaining to Saudi involvement in the 9/11 attacks.

Gaffney thinks Donald Trump’s overwhelming victory in the New York primary was a sign that national security issues are not receiving the proper amount of attention in this election cycle. “I think it’s the defining issue of our time, and we’re still finding ourselves preoccupied with celebrity politics and a lot of other distractions,” he said.

“For a couple of decades, really, if you think about it – I think going back to the end of the Cold War, such as it was – people have stopped thinking about national security,” he lamented. “We’ve been the world’s only superpower. We sent our military around, and it seemed to do decisive jobs, at least until fairly recently.  It was somebody else’s problem, not ours. Our job, as Karl Rove famously said, was to go shopping. This is the sort of genetic makeup of the body politic these days.”

Gaffney praised Breitbart News as one of the media outlets that was “helping people connect with the reality that, whether we’re interested in the war that is upon us – I think it is the war for the free world, a major focus of which is, of course, the global jihad movement – whether we’re interested in it or not, it’s interested in us.”

“We have got to get squared away on this,” he urged. “If we have four more years of this kind of policy of weakness, and emboldening our enemies, and undermining our allies, and the diminishing of our country, we’re toast.”

Gaffney said that all of the Republican candidates had signaled their understanding of the stakes for American security in the 2016 election, although their policy agendas are very different.

“There is a general recognition, I think, among the Republican contenders that more of the same is a formula for disaster for our country, on national security and homeland security grounds most especially,” he said.

Gaffney thought President Obama’s visit to Saudi Arabia was a good moment to release the long-classified “28 pages” of 9/11 intelligence related to the Saudis.

“This is a time, I think, for truth to the Saudis,” he said. “They have been playing a double game against us for a long time. They buy our weapons, they sell us oil, they like us to protect them. But the reality is that they are undermining us in many ways, including through various forms of economic warfare.”

“You know, they said explicitly when they were driving down the price of oil – which consumers like us appreciated, by lower gas prices – that they were doing it to destroy our fracking industry. That is a hostile action. They’re now talking about dumping Treasury bills, if they’re held accountable for what they did on 9/11, and I believe they were directly involved in 9/11. That’s an act of economic warfare as well,” Gaffney charged.

He also said the Saudis were acting to “facilitate and underwrite the jihad,” as long as the jihadis aren’t working to destabilize the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

“That’s an act of real warfare against us, and I think it’s time for the President of the United States to say so to them directly, and effect change there, one way or the other,” he said.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00AM to 9:00AM EST.

You can listen to the full interview with Frank Gaffney below:

Feds Finally Close Terrorist Loophole … Except It Took Eight Years

A Shi'ite Houthi militant poses for a photo during a mass funeral for victims of a suicide attack on followers of the Shi'ite Houthi group, in Sanaa October 14,

A Shi’ite Houthi militant poses for a photo during a mass funeral for victims of a suicide attack on followers of the Shi’ite Houthi group, in Sanaa October 14,

Daily Caller, by Mark Tapscott, April 1, 2016:

It took eight years, a critical inspectors general report, and an investigation from The Daily Caller News Foundation for the head of the General Services Administration to admit that terrorists could easily counterfeit the security badges employees use to get into supposedly secure government locations.

Administrator Denise Roth told TheDCNF through a spokesman Friday that her agency is “discontinuing the practice of issuing building-specific local badges” that make thousands of federal buildings vulnerable to terrorists and active shooters.

“Additionally, in our position at the Interagency Security Committee, GSA will encourage other agencies to avoid the use of building-specific badges and find more secure ways to manage physical access,” the spokesman said.

Even if GSA implements Roth’s decision on an emergency basis, the vulnerabilities the badges create will remain for months, possibly even years.

That prospect deeply worries Stephen Coughlin, former chief adviser to the Department of Defense on radical Islamic law, philosophy and strategies.

[CJR – There is no such thing as radical Islamic law, only Islamic law]

“At a time when we are engaged in a war on terror that includes deep penetration operations that target government personnel and facilities, what you see here is the virtual collapse of a counter-terror/counter intelligence mindset by those charged with that mission,” Coughlin told TheDCNF.

Roth also said the federal government’s housekeeping agency is “requiring more intensive training of employees responsible for administering contracts; and instituting new rules and policies to prevent” such violence, and “is confident that these actions … should reduce the risks identified by the IG.”

Roth’s decision followed TheDCNF’s post Thursday reporting that “thousands of federal buildings are in danger of having ‘an active shooter, terrorist attack, or theft of government property’ because the General Services Administration (GSA) has ignored an eight-year old order to stop issuing ID badges that are easily counterfeited.’”

TheDCNF story was based on an IG report made public the same day.

The flawed badges are routinely issued at many of the 9,600 facilities operated by the agency, including courthouses, ports of entry, laboratories and data centers that are critical to the government’s daily operation. Each facility’s badge is unique and their design makes them an inviting target for terrorists looking for ways to compromise government facilities.

The Department of Homeland Security issued a directive eight years ago instructing federal agencies to stop issuing the badges and adopt a standard design with significant security enhancements.

Roth declined to respond Friday when TheDCNF asked if she was aware of the problem when she became GSA’s chief in 2015. She also declined to respond when TheDCNF asked if any GSA employees have or will be disciplined or fired as a result of the eight-year delay in complying with the Homeland Security directive.

Missiles from Iran-Allied Territory Intercepted On Way to US

hellfire1

Frontpage, by Daniel Greenfield, March 13, 2016

This is an interesting, but still very much a developing story.

 Serbia’s authorities are investigating reports that a cargo package bound for the U.S. containing two missiles with explosive warheads was found on a passenger flight from Lebanon to Serbia.

N1 television said the package with two guided armor-piercing missiles was discovered Saturday by a sniffer dog after an Air Serbia flight from Beirut landed at Belgrade airport.

Serbian media say documents listed the final destination for the AGM-114 Hellfire missiles as Portland, Oregon.

The Lebanon origin is what makes this story somewhat different because the country is currently dominated by Iran and its Shiite terrorist allies. So if this was a terrorist plot, which we don’t know that it was, it appears likelier to have originated from Iran than from ISIS. Portland however was the site of a more conventional Sunni Islamic terror plot. But Shiites also have a presence there.

Another twist was the recently “misplaced” Hellfire that ended up in Cuba.

But where would Iran have gotten hellfire missiles? Like most of the US equipment in the hands of Shiite terrorists, Iraq. The US has sold plenty of hellfires to Iraq. And Iraq’s government and military these days is controlled by Iran’s Shiite puppets.

***

A Counterjihad Security Architecture for America

Stand Up America, by Clare Lopez, Feb. 25, 2016:

Chairman’s Note – Our thanks to Clare Lopez as the senior editor and members of the Legacy National Security Advisory group for all the research and time to develop this important and critical document. Counterjihad security architecture and strategies are more necessary now than ever before.

Paul E. Vallely; Chairman – Stand Up America US

LEGACYLegacy National Security Advisory Group

For far too long, United States foreign policy, especially in the critical region of the Middle East and North Africa, has been pursued with apparent scant attention, much less priority, given to core, compelling U.S. national security objectives in the fight to defeat the Global Jihad Movement. This paper, therefore, offers a blueprint for a counterjihad security architecture for America that identifies those objectives and outlines the measures necessary to provide for the common defense of our Constitution, Republic, and society in this existential struggle of our time.

The U.S. has limited national security objectives in the MENA region, but they are important and must be precisely defined. The following are those objectives:

  1. We must defend U.S. diplomatic, intelligence, and military assets, facilities, and equipment, and ensure the security of our personnel serving abroad.
  2. We must keep open the naval, maritime, and commercial sea-lanes and defend the free passage of oil and other commercial goods.
  3. We must prevent control of the Strait of Hormuz, Bab al-Mandab, Red Sea, and Suez Canal by jihadist or other forces hostile to the U.S., the West in general, and our partners and allies.
  4. We must defend and support our regional allies, primary among which are Egypt, the Jewish State of Israel, Jordan, and the Kurdish people.

It is in U.S. national security interests to seek regional stability, including a balance of power between local Shi’ite and Sunni Islamic forces, however rough or imperfect that balance may be. We must avoid actions that would further destabilize the region, unless compelled in defense of other core U.S. national security objectives. We should refrain from involvement in historical, intra-Islamic sectarian struggles, again, unless compelled in defense of other core U.S. national security objectives. We must accept the reality that Sunni-Shi’ite relations are and will remain messy. We must understand that fashionable policies like ‘exporting democracy,’ ‘COIN (Counterinsurgency)-winning hearts and minds’ and ‘nation building’ are futile among societies in thrall to Islamic Law (shariah). Sometimes accepting local strongman rule that supports U.S. and Western interests, even though not democratic, is the lesser of two evils when the alternative would be either chaos or an Islamic jihad-and-shariah takeover.

We must rebuild the U.S. military ASAP. This includes re-establishing the presence of the Sixth Fleet in the Mediterranean Sea and the Second Fleet in the Atlantic Ocean. Sequestration has decimated the readiness of the U.S. military to respond effectively to key national security requirements, set back modernization of our forces, and hollowed out our overall military capabilities. This must be reversed on an accelerated basis.  Given the known penetration of the U.S. military by operatives and sympathizers of the Muslim Brotherhood, we must carefully vet all Muslim chaplains in the U.S. military for jihadist sympathies and/or Muslim Brotherhood connections.

We must acknowledge the enemy threat doctrine of Islamic Law (shariah) is pursued as a matter of doctrine and faith by the Global Islamic Movement including devout Muslims across the world. The White House must formulate, publish, and implement a new National Security Strategy that defines Islamic Law (shariah) as an enemy threat doctrine. It must be a priority objective of this new National Security Strategy to deter and defeat Islamic jihad globally. To do this, it will be necessary that U.S. national security leadership understand that the shariah threat is advanced by way of jihad, which may be kinetic or non-kinetic (head, heart, hands, including funding). The U.S. Intelligence Community, with new leadership at the White House, National Security Council, Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Director of Central Intelligence, and other key positions, must acknowledge, identify, and remove the jihadist penetration of and influence operations against the U.S. government, especially at top levels of national security. Such a revised National Security Strategy will include consideration of nation states, sub-national jihad groups, individual jihadis, transnational jihadist organizations like the Islamic State/Caliphate, Muslim Brotherhood and Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), associated criminal, gang, and narcotrafficking groups in its overall threat matrix because they all work together, if only on an ad hoc, opportunistic basis.

Guided by such understanding of the Global Jihad Movement (GJM) threat and a new National Security Strategy designed to counter and defeat it, the next task of the U.S. President and his national security team will be to name, define, prioritize, confront, and defeat threats to U.S. national security objectives from U.S. adversaries in the MENA and Central Asian regions, their sponsors, and proxies. Iran is far and away the most critical, dangerous U.S. adversary in the region. Its Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) programs, especially nuclear and Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) programs and Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) delivery systems, pose an existential threat to the U.S. mainland as well as to regional allies like Israel. The expansionist, revolutionary geo-strategic objectives of the Tehran regime derive from the Islamic canon and are expressed in both the Iranian constitution and military doctrine (details of which are now in U.S. possession). The Shi’ite Twelver eschatology of the top Iranian leadership, both clerical and military, actively seeks Armageddon to hasten return of 12th Imam and launch the Islamic End Times.

Iran’s preferred tactic for expansion, power projection, and terror operations relies on proxy forces: Al-Qa’eda, HAMAS, Hizballah, Iraqi Shi’ite terror militias, the Islamic State (IS) and the Taliban. We must develop plans for regime change in Iran to end the mullahs’ pursuit of deliverable nuclear weapons, an EMP-kill-shot capability, support for terrorism, revolutionary expansionism, and appalling human rights abuses against their own people.

iran.small_At the same time, we must understand the Sunni Islamic State, its objectives, and what it represents for the region, vulnerable target areas across the globe, and for individual Muslims worldwide. It must be acknowledged that the Islamic State embodies the hopes and dreams of hundreds of millions among the Muslim ummah that had been without a Caliphate since 1924, for the first time since the early days of Islam. Thus, we must acknowledge that the identifiable, self-declared ambitions of the forces of jihad focus on establishment of that global Caliphate (Islamic governance) under Islamic Law (shariah).

Since its lightening expansion during 2014, the Islamic State generally has been contained in geographic terms in its core area of operations in the former states of Iraq and Syria, both of which have been dominated by Iranian satrap regimes essentially since President George W. Bush removed the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in 2003 and dismantled his Sunni-majority army. It is not in the best interests of U.S. national security to intervene in this intra-Islamic Shi’ite-Sunni fight in any way that tips the advantage to either set of Islamic jihadis, whether Shi’ite or Sunni, but all of whom are dedicated enemies of the U.S., Israel, and the West.

The former states of Iraq and Syria were artificial constructs to begin with, drawn on maps by colonial powers in the 20th century. That they now are splintering along pre-colonial ethnic, sectarian, and tribal lines is likely unavoidable but not a process that threatens core, compelling U.S. national security interests in the region or calls for U.S. involvement to oppose.  On the other hand, jihadist groups and individuals outside of this Middle Eastern region that have been pledging bayat (allegiance) to IS and Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and that generally pre-date the formation of IS, should be targeted by Western powers on a case-by-case basis where their elimination would not simply accrue to the benefit of other jihadist groups or states. Islamic State as well as other jihadist affiliates in Libya and elsewhere must be countered and defeated; the U.S. should provide broad-spectrum assistance against IS forces as requested by local allies and partners and/or as in the best interests of the U.S., to eradicate such presence in their territories. This assistance may include diplomatic, financial, intelligence, military, and political measures.

Many jihadist pro-shariah groups and individuals already have made the hijra (migration) to the West and live among us with the intent of ‘destroying [our] miserable house from within’ (as stated in the Muslim Brotherhood’s 1991 report, ‘The Explanatory Memorandum’). Physical annihilation of the Islamic State’s Middle East Caliphate is a necessary ultimate objective that will set back the Global Jihad Movement but not destroy it, principally because the GJM already has a presence worldwide and because the ideology of jihad derives directly from the Qur’an, hadiths, Sirat, and shariah of the Islamic canon.

Fellow jihadist organization and sometime Islamic State rival Al-Qa’eda is not dead: it is vibrant and currently engaged in savage rivalry with the IS and others over dominance of the Global Jihad Movement. AQ regional affiliates have multiplied since 9/11 and today include: Al-Qa’eda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), Al-Qa’eda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), Jabhat al-Nusra, and the Taliban, among numerous other jihadist groups. The AQ-IS rivalry is likely to impel each to seek to out-do the other with terror operations targeting the U.S., the West, Israel, and other allies.

U.S. national security leadership, military officers and personnel, and local law enforcement officers must read and study the AQ Timeline for Conquest of the West (as published in August 2005 by Der Spiegel). We are now in Phase Six of Seven (2016-2020 is the time of ‘total confrontation’). This timeline should be made required reading at all service academies, Staff/Command and War Colleges and throughout the Pentagon. The U.S. must re-establish all training curriculum materials and instructors previously purged under Muslim Brotherhood influence that accurately teach the threat from Islamic jihad and shariah.

US President Barack Obama and Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Washington. Photo: REUTERS

US President Barack Obama and Turkish PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan in Washington. Photo: REUTERS

The Turkish regime under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan harbors neo-Ottoman jihadist aspirations and under current leadership cannot be considered a viable NATO or Western ally unless its behavior significantly turns toward supporting U.S. and NATO objectives. Rather, Turkey is a destabilizing force in the Middle East, especially because of its apparently fixed resolve to oust the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad. Further, this jihadist Turkish leadership views Israel as a Jewish enemy and Iran and Saudi Arabia both as Islamic rivals for regional domination. Turkey has supported IS since its inception because it views the group as a capable proxy force against Bashar al-Assad. Turkey also supports other jihadist militias including Ahrar al-Sham. Ankara’s permission for IS and other jihadis to use Turkey as a gateway to Syrian battlefields, establish terror training camps on its territory, and find safehaven there, eventually will threaten Turkey itself. Turkey’s enduring enmity towards the Kurds, both within Turkey and elsewhere, ensures ongoing, destabilizing efforts by Ankara to attack, counter, and degrade the Kurds’ equally determined nationalist aspirations. Pro-West, anti-jihadist Kurds are a natural ally for the U.S. and should be recognized and aided as such.

Russia is not a Middle East regional power but seeks to project power and influence there. Russian President Vladimir Putin’s KGB-controlled Kremlin is not a U.S. partner: it is an adversary whose expansionist ambitions and longtime collaboration with Islamic terror groups and regimes like Iran’s must be countered firmly.

Putin’s Middle East objectives center on sea access to the southeastern littoral of the Mediterranean Sea, oil interests, and foreign military sales, to include elements of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs and other large scale weaponry and armaments. Despite protestations of seeking to forestall chaotic destabilization, Moscow’s Middle East regional objectives and behavior run counter to U.S. national security interests.

These include Russian support for Iran’s nuclear, other WMD, and ballistic missile programs; its determination to ensure that Bashar al-Assad or other Moscow-friendly regime will retain power in Damascus; its historical intelligence and military ties to Middle Eastern terrorist groups, including Hizballah, PFLP, PLO, Iranian Khomeinists and their successors, as well as the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Qa’eda; the supply of advanced military hardware and associated capabilities to forces inimical to U.S. national security interests in the region; the destabilizing, catastrophic human rights effects of savage bombing in civilian areas and against U.S.-backed Syrian rebel groups like the Syrian Free Army; and displacement of historical U.S. influence with regional governments (e.g., Egypt).

Saudi Arabia is a font of global jihad ideology. Despite the necessity of working with the Saudis to counter other, more dangerous regional threats like Iran and IS, Riyadh royals must be recognized for the civilizational adversary that they are, who have backed, exported, and funded jihad worldwide for decades. A principal reason why the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has not fielded a serious military force to counter IS is that Saudi regime depends for legitimacy on its Wahhabi clerical establishment which finds more in common with IS’ pure practice of Islam than with dissolute Saudi princes. That Saudi Arabia at some point may face attack from Iran and/or IS, or that its eastern oil fields region may come under Iranian and/or IS frontal and/or subversive pressure adds complexity to defense of U.S. interests in the region, but should not blind us to the essential jihadist nature of the Saudi leadership.

America needs a new U.S. National Security Strategy to defeat the Global Jihad Movement. To accomplish this, we must first name the jihadist Iranian regime the number one most immediately critical threat to U.S. national security in the Middle East region and perhaps in the world. We must develop plans to destroy Iran’s key nuclear infrastructure, including key military and civilian facilities, e.g., power grids, IRGC, IRGC-Qods Force, Bassij, and Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS) command centers, etc. We must end official collaboration with and/or support for the Iranian regime, its puppet regimes in Baghdad, Beirut, and Damascus, and/or any of its proxies, including Hizballah, Iraqi Shi’ite militias, and the Taliban. We must declare formal U.S. government commitment to regime change in Tehran, support for the free expression of the will of the Iranian people, and our willingness to work with Iranian opposition groups, especially the Mujahedeen-e Khalq (MeK) and its political umbrella group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI).

We must abrogate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and declare Iran’s nuclear weapons program illicit and in violation of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and multiple UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions. We must declare Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program a valid target for possible military and/or other offensive action unless any and all suspect sites are immediately opened to IAEA inspections that include U.S. nationals on the teams.

iran-nuclear-dealWe must declare Iran’s ballistic missile program in violation of UNSC Resolutions and subject to possible military and/or other offensive action until/unless verifiably dismantled. We must demand full accounting for Iran’s past nuclear weapons program work and should withhold funding for the IAEA until it reverses its capitulation to Tehran regime on the so-called Possible Military Dimensions (PMDs) of the Iranian nuclear weapons program. We must demand immediate and unconditional release of all U.S. hostages held by the Iranians and/or any of their terror proxies.

It is absolutely critical that we secure the U.S. civilian electric grid ASAP. Its continued vulnerability to EMP attack by Iran, North Korea, or other adversary, to cyber-attack, physical terrorist attack, or to periodic massive solar flares called Coronal Mass Ejections is unconscionable when the technical capability exists to harden the grid and the actual financial cost is so affordable, relative to the threat that life as we know it in America could end. Both the Critical Infrastructure Protection Act (CIPA) and the SHIELD Act must be passed out of Congress and signed by the President without any further delay.

The U.S. should announce a return to full, vocal official diplomatic commitment to the survival of the Jewish State of Israel within secure borders and end all funding for the Palestinian Authority and the UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWRA). We must renew and upgrade the U.S. defense relationship with Israel and accelerate approval for sales of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) and other bunker-busting munitions to Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). The U.S. should provide the IDF with enhanced air refueling capability and consider other, enhanced collaboration on and funding for the Iron Dome, Arrow, David’s Sling, Magic Wand, and other missile defense systems as well as other defensive measures.

The Department of State should open bilateral discussions on countering Iran’s existential threat to Israel, including the possibility of Israel ‘taking its bomb out of the basement’ and announcing commitment to the principle of anticipatory self-defense under international law. And symbolically, but most important of all, the U.S. should move its official Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, which is the eternal, undivided capital of the Jewish State of Israel. Our very visible and strong relationship with Israel must be seen as unequivocal in the eyes of the international community.

The U.S. should declare official support for the national aspirations of the Kurdish people, whether in autonomous zones or something more formal (to be the subject of discussions). We should upgrade immediately U.S. military and weapons assistance to the Kurdish Peshmerga that are fighting forces of the Damascus regime as well as IS. We should expand the U.S. economic commitment to Kurdish-controlled areas for development & infrastructure projects.

FILE – This undated file image posted on a militant website on Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2014 shows fighters from the al-Qaida linked Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) marching in Raqqa, Syria.

FILE – This undated file image posted on a militant website on Tuesday, Jan. 14, 2014 shows fighters from the al-Qaida linked Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) marching in Raqqa, Syria.

In terms of a broader U.S. regional strategy, we should announce a ‘non-intervention’ policy for the intra-Islamic Shi’ite-Sunni struggle. This should not, however, necessarily obviate continued U.S. air strikes, or the targeted deployment of Special Operations forces against IS in the Caliphate area of operations on a limited basis. We should arm, back, fund, and train U.S. regional allies, including Egypt, Israel, Jordan, the Kurds, and other minority groups including Christians and Yazidis. We should consider expansion of the U.S. military commitment to counter IS in other areas outside of its Middle East core area of operations such as in North and West Africa; Egypt/Sinai Peninsula, and elsewhere. It is most important that we ensure U.S. actions do not tip the balance in favor of either Shi’ite or Sunni jihadist enemies.

Domestically, the President should seek Congressional legislation to designate a new listing for Hostile Foreign Powers, to which all jihadist entities, whether kinetic or subversive, national, sub-national or transnational, would be named. The new listing would be the basis to purge all U.S. federal, state, and local bureaucracies of pro-shariah jihadist influences, especially the Muslim Brotherhood, its front organizations, and associated individuals. We must re-establish an official U.S. government-wide training curriculum to instruct on Islamic doctrine, law, scriptures and their role as inspirational sources for Islamic terrorism.

The Department of Justice must begin prosecution of the 200-plus unindicted co-conspirators in the 2008 Holy Land Foundation HAMAS terror funding trial. The President must instruct the FBI to investigate and the Department of Justice to prosecute sedition and material support for terrorism aggressively. If found guilty of subversion and / or sedition of the United States of America, mosques and the associated imams or mullahs that preach sedition and jihad must be closed, and their religious leaders, if indicted, will be prosecuted and, if necessary deported or imprisoned.

It is critical that the U.S. develop comprehensive immigration and refugee resettlement policy reform. We should prioritize funding for refugees already in safe camps in the Middle East to remain near their former homes so as to improve the likelihood they will go home whenever the situation permits. The President and State Governors should seek Congressional legislation that requires involvement by state and local jurisdictions in every step of the immigration and refugee resettlement process. The Departments of Homeland Security, Justice, and State must begin to apply discriminatory vetting to exclude those who favor or harbor jihadist ideology or are unlikely to assimilate well into US society. Federal agencies should selectively favor immigration, refugee processing, and visas for Middle East Christians, Yazidis, and others persecuted for their religious beliefs.

Finally, candidates for public office, Congressional representatives, defense and national security officials, and all who accept the responsibilities incumbent on those who take the oath of office to ‘protect and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic’ should see the Secure Freedom Strategy, published by the Center for Security Policy in 2015, for a whole-of-government, whole-of-society approach to defeating the Global Jihad Movement: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/the-secure-freedom-strategy/

Introducing CounterJihad, CAIR’s Worst Nightmare

CounterJihad.com

CounterJihad.com


Breitbart, by Jordan Schachtel, Feb. 22, 2016:

Secure Freedom, an initiative of the Center for Security Policy (CSP), will be launching a new campaign called CounterJihad, an endeavor that hopes to empower readers with the intellectual firepower to fight back against the radical Islamic current that is coming over this nation, and the rest of the world.

CounterJihad’s mission statement, posted on its website, is to educate all Americans regarding the radical Islamist threat the nation faces today. “We are a movement of American citizen-activists dedicated to safeguarding the country from the danger posed by Islamic Supremacists,” it states.

“We are all aware of the barbaric acts of ISIS, al Qaeda and the others flying the Black Flag. Sadly their violence continues to kill innocents around the world and here at home. They fight in the cause of Jihad to impose their totalitarian religion on all people,” a statement on the CounterJihad site reads.

“But they are not the only ones working toward that goal,” the initiative warns. “There are other Islamist groups who seem much less dangerous on the surface, but actually represent an even more insidious threat to free western society. They seek to use our very freedoms as weapons against us.”

The CounterJihad initiative hopes to provide the American people intellectual firepower against the Islamic forces that seek to undermine western values. Moreover, The CounterJihad project hopes that everyday Americans will spread its message far and wide, from the city blocks of Manhattan to the rural backcountry of this nation.

In a world destabilizing rapidly, Islamist radicals have seized power vacuums opened by the West’s unwillingness to stand up to the forces antithetical to freedom. Far-left and anti-free speech totalitarians have empowered these groups by condemning any and all criticism of radical Islam, labeling individuals and groups who do so as ‘racists’ and ‘Islamophobes.’

From the powers fueling the so-called Arab Spring, to the Muslim Brotherhood’s temporary seizure of power in Egypt, to the rise of the Islamic State and the Ayatollah’s theocracy in Iran, radical jihadi outfits have sprung up exponentially in this second decade of the 21st century.

Islamist entities have also secured footing in the United States. Among the more prominent is the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), which poses as a Muslim civil rights organization while maintaining ties to Islamist groups worldwide. CAIR operatives have met with White House officials, yet they have previously demanded the silencing of their critics in accordance with Sharia law.

CAIR has been declared a terrorist organization in the United Arab Emirates and was named by federal prosecutors as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation’s Hamas-funding operation. In December, an FBI chart, along with governmental testimony, surfaced that alleged CAIR was a Hamas-related organization.

Jim Hanson, CSP’s executive vice president, tells Breitbart News the new campaign is “a response to the incursion by dangerous Islamist groups and their intolerant ideology into the American way of life. We will educate the public and explain how concerned Americans can help stop this.”

CounterJihad will focus on educating the American people about Sharia; Violent Jihad; Civilization Jihad; the Muslim Brotherhood in America; Slander, Blasphemy and Censorship; Migration; Threats To The Electric Grid; and the Iranian Threat Doctrine.

CounterJihad is not designed in any way, shape, or form to target Muslims, Hanson explained. “We’re not anti-Muslim, but we strongly oppose those Muslims who believe they are divinely called to impose totalitarian sharia doctrine on others.”