FBI, CIA go on hiring spree in America’s most Muslim city

FBI

WND, by Leo Hohman, July 14, 2016:

The FBI and CIA are looking to increase the “diversity” of their agencies and that includes hiring more Arab Americans.

One of the ways it hopes to achieve its goal of greater diversity is by holding a career fair in America’s most Islamic city – Dearborn, Michigan.

Notices about the career fair have been posted on the Arab-American Chamber of Commerce’s Facebook page, as well as in local news publications in Dearborn.

fbi-cia-ad-dearborn-michigan

The Press and Guide, for instance, ran a public notice that stated the following;

“Learn about working for two top government agencies during an informational session being held by The Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation.

“Attendees will learn about both agencies and have the chance to hear about career opportunities as well as network with CIA and FBI representatives.

“The event takes place at 6 p.m. July 19 at the Ford Motor Company Conference & Event Center, 1151 Village Road, Dearborn. A formal presentation will run from 6 to 7:30 p.m. followed by networking from 7:30 to 8:30.

“Both the FBI and CIA are seeking to increase diversity within the organizations and find specifically skilled applicants to fulfill critical roles within the agencies.

“Those at the event will hear about specific job positions and qualifications through a panel discussion as well as the agencies’ similarities, strategic differences and shared commitment to thwart threats to national security.

“Dinner will be provided, but seating is limited. RSVP by July 12 to Christina Petrosian at chrissp@ucia.gov.”

Petrosian did not immediately respond to emails from WND.

Dick Manasseri, communications director for Secure Michigan, a citizen-watchdog group fighting what it sees as the Islamization of Michigan, said he found the advertisements troubling, but not surprising.

“How can the FBI/CIA vet job applicants when they cannot mention the word Shariah?’” Manasseri said.

Manasseri was referring to the scrubbing of all FBI training manuals, removing all references to Shariah and Islam that were seen as discriminatory by Muslim groups. That concession was made in response to complaints by the Council of American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, by then-Deputy National Security Adviser John Brennan, who is now in charge of the CIA.

“How can the FBI/CIA vet the information provided on applications from Shariah-adherents who are encouraged to lie to non-Muslims when it furthers the goals of Shariah?” Manasseri told WND.

The Obama administration has also invited former CAIR officials into its circle of advisers within the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

“The opportunities for further federal government infiltration increases the probability that we will see Shariah courts in Southeast Michigan before long,” Manasseri said.

Dearborn’s population is about 40 percent Arab and includes both Sunni and Shiite Muslims. A minority of the Arab-American community in Dearborn are Christian.

And the Dearborn area is getting more Muslim by the month thanks to the current Syrian refugee program being carried out by President Obama. Just in the last nine months the U.S. State Department has delivered 143 Syrians to Dearborn for permanent resettlement.

Another 174 Syrians have been sent to Troy, which is only 25 miles north of Dearborn.

Michigan has been targeted to receive nearly half of the 10,000 Syrian refugees Obama has promised the United Nations he would admit into the U.S.

After getting off to a slow start, Syrian arrivals are now occurring by the hundreds per day. On Wednesday another 249 Syrians arrived in the U.S. for permanent resettlement.

Obama’s pledge of 10,000 Syrian refugees in fiscal 2016, which ends Sept. 30, now appears to be a deadline he will make. His State Department has delivered nearly 60 percent of the 10,000 with two and a half months to go.

Senate Intelligence Committee to Investigate ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism Problem

160613082242-01-orlando-shooting-0613-super-169.sized-770x415xtPJ MEDIA, BY PATRICK POOLE, JULY 14, 2016:

Why do Americans keep getting killed in terrorist attacks by individuals already known to and investigated by the FBI?

That’s the question that the Senate Intelligence Committee will look at over the next six months in the wake of the largest terror attack on American soil since 9/11 that killed 49 and wounded 53 more, where the Orlando killer had already been investigated twice before by the FBI.

As I’ve reported here at PJ Media for nearly two years, the “Known Wolf” terrorism problem has extended to virtually every Islamic terrorist attack inside the U.S. occurring during the Obama administration.

The New York Post reports:

A US Senate committee has launched a multi-pronged probe delving into the failures of U.S. Intelligence agencies under the Obama Administration to prevent ISIS-linked domestic and international acts of terror, The Post has learned.Oklahoma Republican Senator James Lankford, who works on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is spearheading the six-month probe primarily focused on terror attacks committed by individuals who have been investigated or interviewed in the past, officials said.

Lankford noted that the FBI was unable to prevent the terror attacks in San Bernardino, Calif., Orlando, Fla. and Boston – and the American public is now keeping tabs on the country’s top law enforcement agency […]

Domestically, the official said, the Senate Intelligence Committee is looking into why “these bad guys” are interviewed and placed on watch lists, and then wind up committing terrorist attacks in the U.S.

Sadly, there’s a considerable backlog of cases for the committee to investigate:

Orlando: Omar Mateen had been interviewed by the FBI on three separate occasions, including an open preliminary investigation in 2013 lasting 10 months, after telling others about mutual acquaintances shared with the Boston bombers and making extremist statements. He was investigated again in 2014 for his contacts with a suicide bomber who attended the same mosque. At one point Mateen was placed on two separate terrorism databases but was later removed.Columbus: When Mohamed Barry attacked patrons with a machete at an Israeli-owned deli and later charged police shouting “Allah Akhbar,” at which time he was shot and killed, he had already been investigated by the FBI for making extremist statements. Barry had been entered on a federal watch list and it appears remained on it until the time of the attack as his car had been flagged by authorities, but no further investigation was made.

Garland, TX: Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi were killed in a shootout with law enforcement outside a convention center where they had planned to attack a Muhammad cartoon drawing contest. But Simpson had been known to the FBI for years before going back to his involvement in a terror cell in Phoenix. He was even prosecuted for his involvement, and while a judge found that the had lied to the FBI about his plans overseas, he ruled that there was not sufficient evidence to prove Simpson intended to commit terrorism. He was subsequentlyplaced on the no-fly list, and the FBI opened up another investigation after he had made statements online in support of the Islamic State.

Seattle, Newark: in 2014, Ali Muhammad Brown went on a cross-country killing spree murdering 3 victims in Washington and another in New Jersey claiming that they were “vengeance” for U.S. actions in the Middle East. As a teenager Brown had reportedly trained at one of the first known U.S. terror training camps, and was later arrested in 2004 aspart of a Seattle terror cell. At the time of his killing spree, prosecutors said he was on the terror watch list.

Boston: Prior to the bombing of the Boston Marathon by Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in April 2013 killed three people and injured 264 others. the FBI had been tipped off, twice, by Russian intelligence warning that Tamerlan was “a follower of radical Islam.” Initially, the FBI denied ever meeting with Tamerlan, but they later claimed that they followed up on the lead, couldn’t find anything in their databases linking him to terrorism, and quickly closed the case. After the second Russian warning, Tamerlan’s file was flagged by federal authorities demanding “mandatory” detention if he attempted to leave or re-enter the U.S. — but his name was misspelled when it was entered. An internal report of the handling of the Tsarnaev’s case unsurprisingly exonerated the FBI.

Underwear Bomber: When Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab boarded Detroit-bound Northwest Flight 253 on Christmas Day 2009 with 289 other passengers wearing a bomb intended to bring down the plane, he was already well-known to U.S. intelligence officials. The month before the attempted bombing, Abdulmutallab’s father had gone to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria and met with two CIA officers telling them he wasconcerned about his son’s extremism. His name was added to the Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment database, but not the FBI’s Terrorist Screening Database or the no-fly list. when asked about the near-takedown of the flight and the missteps, then-Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano remarkably told CNN that “the system worked.”

Fort Hood: Within days of Major Hasan’s shooting rampage at Fort Hood, killing 13, news reports indicated that the FBI was aware of his email correspondence with al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki nearly a year before he launched his terror attack. The FBI was quick to issue a press release absolving themselves of responsibility, claiming that the email exchange was innocuous and consistent with Major Hasan’s religious research. But after the emails intercepted by the FBI were made publicin 2012, there were clear indications of Major Hasan’s terrorist intent. Hasan had also repeatedly given powerpoint briefings that proved to be highly controversial to his fellow Army colleagues that threatened insider attacks by Muslims if they weren’t released as “conscientious objectors.”

Little Rock: When Bledsoe gunned down two U.S. Army soldiers in front of a Little Rock recruiting center in June 2009, killing Pvt. William Long, it was not his first contact with the FBI. Bureau agents had interviewed Bledsoe in Yemen and after his return to the U.S. in 2008, but had failed to follow up. After the Little Rock shooting, FBI officials said that he wasmotivated by “political and religious motives,” but refused to identify the incident as a terrorist attack.

Going back to October 2014 when I first identified the problem of “Known Wolf” terrorism and coined the phrase, I’ve documented the “Known Wolf” phenomenon both here in the U.S. and in other Western countries:

Oct. 24, 2014: ‘Lone Wolf’ or ‘Known Wolf’: The Ongoing Counter-Terrorism FailureDec. 15, 2014: Sydney Hostage Taker Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Syndrome

Jan. 7, 2015: Paris Terror Attack Yet Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Syndrome

Feb. 3, 2015: French Police Terror Attacker Yesterday Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Syndrome

Feb. 15, 2015: Copenhagen Killer Was yet Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism

Feb. 26, 2015: Islamic State Beheader ‘Jihadi John’ Yet Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism

Apr. 22, 2015: Botched Attack on Paris Churches Another Case of “Known Wolf” Terrorism

May 4, 2015: Texas Attack Is Yet Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism

June 26, 2015: France’s Beheading Terrorist Was Well-Known By Authorities

July 16, 2015: Report: Chattanooga Jihadist Was Yet Another ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorist, Anonymous Feds Dispute

Aug. 22, 2015: European Train Attacker Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism

Oct 14, 2015: Yet Again: Turkey, Israel Terror Attacks Committed by “Known Wolves”

Nov 14, 2015: One Paris Attacker Was Previously Known to Authorities, Marks Fifth ‘Known Wolf” Attack in France This Year

Feb 16, 2016: Machete Attack in Ohio Yet Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ Terrorism

May 16, 2016: NBC News Reports Yet Another Case of ‘Known Wolf’ U.S. Terrorists

June 12, 2016: Orlando Night Club Attack by “Known Wolf” Terrorist Previously Investigated by FBI

From all available evidence it seems clear that the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation into the ‘Known Wolf’ terror problem comes none too soon.

Also see:

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

State and Local Law Enforcement Must Take the Lead Against Jihad

Crime Scene

Crime Scene

Terror Trends Bulletin, by Christopher W. Holton, July 4, 2016:

In case you haven’t noticed, the global Jihadist insurgency has entered a new, more dangerous phase in the past two years.

The number of Jihadis and the number of attacks that they have carried out–as well as the number of casualties they have inflicted and the number of countries they operate in–has grown drastically.

The excellent, private IntelCenter organization estimates that the Islamic State has killed 18,000 people in 28 countries since they declared their Caliphate on 29 June 2014.

This includes individual acts of Jihad carried out in this country in places like Orlando, Chattanooga, Boston, Garland, San Bernardino, Queens and Philadelphia.

There is no reason to believe that this trend won’t continue. The effort to take down the caliphate is half-hearted at best because it simply isn’t something our president is interested in. He feels as if he killed Bin Laden and that should have been enough. Never mind that the world has become awash in Jihad since then.

Because of the complete lack of leadership on this vital issue, our federal bureaucratized counterterrorism apparatus is not even allowed to study Islamic threat doctrine–the very doctrine that the Islamic State cites repeatedly.

Time and time again we find that the warning signs of the Jihadi attackers were missed. We were warned about the Tsarnaev brothers (the Boston bombers) repeatedly by the Russians and the FBI knew that their mosque was founded by a convicted Al Qaeda member. Yet they were still able to carry out their attack.

There were warning signs about the San Bernardino Jihadis as well. The female, Tafsheen Malik, used a fake address to obtain a visa to enter the U.S. She also gained entry into the U.S. under the horribly flawed federal “Visa Express” program that allows applicants to bypass the interview in the screening process.

Moreover, DHS whistleblower Phillip Haney has testified before Congress and written in his new book, “See Something, Say Nothing,” that he had been ordered to cease investigations into Tablighi Jamaat, the notorious Islamist organization that had ties to the San Bernardino mosque.

Then there is the case of Orlando shooter, Omar Mateen, who was twice interviewed by the FBI because he was in the contact list for an American Islamikaze bomber in Syria and because he made “incendiary” remarks to co-workers about Jihad. Oh, and his Dad posted pro-Taliban videos too. He was given the all-clear, only to end up massacring 49 innocent Americans.

What all this points to is the vital need for state and local law enforcement to take the lead against Jihad inside this country. I promise you, the NYPD does not wait for the FBI to vet suspected terrorists. Other state and local agencies around the country need to take the same approach, albeit with resources that can’t match the NYPD, which is probably the most effective counterterrorism law enforcement organization anywhere in the world.

The fact is, the Feds are unaccountable. They can’t follow up all the leads they have now and very often have a lack of knowledge as to what or who they are dealing with. I have a hunch that the FBI agents who interviewed Omar Mateen probably thought he was creepy at best, but they had nothing to charge him with and they had to go about their business. Complicating matters even more is the fact that both the FBI and DHS are forbidden from tying Islam to terrorism. That restriction right there makes them ineffective at conducting counterintelligence operations.

State and local cops are not unaccountable. They have deep roots in their communities. If an Omar Mateen is in someone’s precinct and they know he is a known associate of an Islamikaze bomber and made threatening statements about terrorism, they will keep an eye on him way past the initial interview. There won’t be much more important in that precinct once an Omar Mateen comes to the local cops’ attention.

Furthermore, state and local police are not under any restriction to refrain from studying the enemy threat doctrine. If the local sheriff or police chief is bold enough, he will mandate that his intelligence and investigative people get educated about the threat in an objective, unbiased manner–allowing the subject matter to take them where it leads them, rather than starting from the position that there is no connection between Islam and terrorism.

State and local police are now at the tip of the spear in this war. 15 years ago America sent soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines overseas to protect us all from Jihad. Today, local law enforcement is being tasked with protecting soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines from Jihad inside our own country. This is a profound shift in this war that has been lost on the overwhelming majority of the American people.

In Garland, Texas, it was a 62-year old motorcycle cop who gunned down the two Jihadi attackers who were wielding AK47s.

In Chattanooga, Tennessee, it was the local police who gunned down Mohammad Abdulazeez.

In Boston, it was Boston PD who ran down the Tsarnaev brothers.

In Queens, New York, it was rookie patrolmen who were targeted by and gunned down Zale Thompson.

The San Bernardino shooters were killed by members of the San Bernardino Sheriff’s Department.

In Philadelphia, it was a police officer sitting in his patrol car that was targeted by Edward Archer in the name of ISIS.

And, of course, we know that it was the Orlando Police Department who responded to Omar Mateen’s massacre.

By the time DHS and FBI show up, they have to ask permission to cross the crime scene tape. In Marine Corps parlance, by the time the Feds get involved, it’s “right of bang.”

State and local police need to prepare to operate against Jihadis “left of bang,” and that means taking their own initiative and not depending solely on our bureaucratized, federal counterterrorism apparatus for training or intelligence about potential bad guys in their jurisdictions.

Ted Cruz to Hold Hearing on Cover-up of Islamic Terror by Obama Administration

cruzConservative Review, By: Daniel Horowitz | June 22, 2016

It’s been over a week since the largest terror attack on American soil in 15 years, yet nobody in Congress has successfully steered the discussion to the actual source of our perilous security situation. The Obama administration is covering up all connections of the Orlando shooter to known Islamic terrorists with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood advising DHS and the FBI.  Yet, all Republicans and Democrats want to discuss is guns. That is about to change.

Next Tuesday, June 28, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who chairs the Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts, will conduct a hearing investigating the willful blindness on the part of the relevant law enforcement agencies to domestic Islamic terror networks.  The subject of the hearing is “Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts To Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism.”

Senators on the committee now have an opportunity to expose the Muslim Brotherhood influence within DHS and the FBI, their invidious “Countering Violent Extremism” Agenda, and their hand in covering up counter-terrorism investigations.

Senator Cruz hinted at the agenda he plans to pursue at this hearing in an op-ed for Conservative Review earlier this week:

President Obama’s politically correct reluctance to attribute the terrorist threat we face with radical Islam hobbles our ability to combat it by discouraging counterterrorism agents from taking radical Islam into account when evaluating potential threats. The examples of Fort Hood, Boston, San Bernardino, and Orlando demonstrate the harmful consequences of this administration’s willful blindness.

Just yesterday, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced at a press conference that the motives of the Orlando jihadist might never be known and that “our most effective response to terror…is unity and love.”  This comes on the heels of the government’s attempt to redact any mention of Islamic rhetoric in the 911 call and DHS releasing another internal document scrubbing all references to Islamic terror. Just this week, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a front group for Hamas, was allowed to sit in on FBI interviews with members of the Fort Pierce mosque. The FBI was supposed to cut ties with CAIR, and DOJ was supposed to prosecute them in 2009 following the Holy Land Foundation trial, in which CAIR was implicated as a co-conspirator, yet they are granted full access to FBI counter-terrorism investigations.     How can Republicans let this stand for one day? Worse, they are validating the Democrat premise by obsequiously holding vote after vote on the non sequitur of gun control while our own government is willfully allowing Islamic terrorist sympathizers to operate freely within DHS and sabotage all investigations that would have prevented these attacks.

Phil Haney interview

This hearing will likely focus on which figures within the federal government worked to squelch any research connecting the dots between local Muslim Brotherhood officials, these individual terrorists, and foreign terror networks. Senators on the committee now have an opportunity to expose the Muslim Brotherhood influence within DHS and the FBI, their invidious “Countering Violent Extremism” Agenda, and their hand in covering up counter-terrorism investigations.  They can demonstrate how the federal government has hamstrung local law enforcement by refusing to cooperate and share information regarding jihadists living in their communities.

Most importantly, this is the first opportunity to finally change the narrative from the false discussion about guns, which has nothing to do with Islamic Jihad. Hopefully, this committee hearing will be the beginning of a concerted effort for the legislative branch to actually engage in some critical oversight of the perfidious actions within the top echelons of federal law enforcement.  The fact that GOP leaders in the House and Senate are not pushing multiple hearings and legislation dealing with this issue is scandalous, but unfortunately, not unexpected.

Homeland Security Adviser Demands National Gun Registry

Gamal-Abdel-Hafiz.sized-770x415xtPJ MEDIA, BY PATRICK POOLE, JUNE 20, 2016:

Following the terror attack in Orlando, the dominant media/political narrative turned to gun control and now-discredited claims of the suspect’s mental illness (claims which included gay-baiting).

Now, one controversial former FBI agent — and current consultant to the Obama administration on “countering violent extremism” (CVE) — is suggesting a national gun registry be created. Such a registry would target millions of law-abiding American citizens.

Gamal Abdel-Hafiz, born in Cairo, immigrated to the U.S. in 1990. He recently retired from the FBI after 22 turbulent years at the bureau. Following the Orlando attack, Abdel-Hafiz explained his rationale for creating a national gun registry:

A former FBI counter-terrorism agent says lawmakers could make mass murders less likely. “What we need to do is keep the ownership of guns known to the government, so we know who has what,” said security consultant Gamal Abdel-Hafiz. “And I know a lot of people are against that.”

He also defended the FBI’s handling of the Mateen case, despite the FBI having conducted multiple interviews with the killer based on statements and threats of violence he had made, and then shutting down the investigation:

“He shouldn’t have been able to buy a gun legally. He shouldn’t,” said Abdel-Hafiz about 29-year-old Omar Mateen. He says 3 FBI interviews should have been enough to keep Mateen on the radar, but he also knows why he wasn’t. “Once you investigate someone and clear them, you have to remove them from the watch list by law,” he explained Monday from his office in Dallas.And even if Mateen had been on a terror watch list, or no-fly list, that would not have prohibited him from legally buying weapons, including a high-velocity semi-automatic assault rifle.

“That means the list is useless then,” the former agent said. Efforts to ban weapon sales to those on watch lists have been blocked in Congress. Some lawmakers say the lists could violate a person’s Second Amendment rights. “As long as our politicians keep fighting each other for the sake of fighting each other, more innocent people will keep on dying,” he said.

Remarkably, he admits that the various terror watch lists and no-fly lists are useless. Moments after suggesting another list. He doesn’t explain how a national gun registry — yet another government list targeting millions of law-abiding Americans — would prevent another terror attack.

It’s unlikely that Abdel-Hafiz would agree to a facially unconstitutional registry of Muslim Americans. So why is he agreeable to attempts to strip Americans — including perhaps thousands of Muslim Americans — of their Second Amendment rights without the conviction of any crime?

The WFAA interview concludes with this ominous detail:

Gamal Abdel-Hafiz is now consulting on a government counter violent extremist project to reduce the threat of homegrown terrorists. He’s an avid gun owner. But he says the carnage in Orlando shows that gun law must be part of the conversation.

Abdel-Hafiz is advising the Obama administration on its disastrous “countering violent extremism” policies that were very likely more responsible for the mass killing in Orlando than any current gun law. As someone advising Homeland Security and law enforcement agencies on “countering violent extremism,” it raises the issues surrounding his controversial tenure with the FBI.

In December 2002, ABC News reported accusations by two veteran FBI investigators that Abdel-Hafiz interfered in ongoing terror investigations:

Perhaps most astounding of the many mistakes, according to Flessner and an affidavit filed by Wright, is how an FBI agent named Gamal Abdel-Hafiz seriously damaged the investigation. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz, who is Muslim, refused to secretly record one of al-Kadi’s suspected associates, who was also Muslim. Wright says Abdel-Hafiz told him, Vincent and other agents that “a Muslim doesn’t record another Muslim.”“He wouldn’t have any problems interviewing or recording somebody who wasn’t a Muslim, but he could never record another Muslim,” said Vincent.

Wright said he “was floored” by Abdel-Hafiz’s refusal and immediately called the FBI headquarters. Their reaction surprised him even more: “The supervisor from headquarters says, ‘Well, you have to understand where he’s coming from, Bob.’ I said no, no, no, no, no. I understand where I’m coming from,” said Wright. “We both took the same damn oath to defend this country against all enemies foreign and domestic, and he just said no? No way in hell.”

Far from being reprimanded, Abdel-Hafiz was promoted to one of the FBI’s most important anti-terrorism posts, the American Embassy in Saudi Arabia, to handle investigations for the FBI in that Muslim country.

Abdel-Hafiz was ordered fired in May 2003 by the FBI’s top disciplinary officer for a variety of personal and professional problems, including insurance fraud and mismanagement of important 9/11-related files at the bureau’s office in Riyadh.

The ordering firing Abdel-Hafiz was later overruled in 2004 by a special three-man panel convened to hear the case. As Newsweek reported, his reinstatement coincided with efforts by the FBI to hire more Muslim and Arabic-speaking personnel.

Despite his reinstatement, controversy continued to follow the troubled FBI agent.

As the New York Times reported just last year, the reinstated Abdel-Hafiz was placed in the bureau’s Post-Adjudication Risk Management program in 2012 that stripped him of access to certain classified material that he claimed was necessary to do his job.

Yet now he is advising the Obama administration on their “countering violent extremism” policies. We have heard disturbing reports recently from other “CVE” advisers, such as one who said that the 9/11 terror attacks “changed the world for good” and another who blamed 9/11 on Israel.

This should raise serious concerns about the quality of “CVE” advice the administration receives.

***

Daniel Horowitz: There Is a Fifth Column in the American Government:

***

Former FBI Assistant Director: Bureau Is Blocked from Investigating Muslims:

Also see:

House To Hold Hearing On DHS Readiness After Reauthorizing Agency’s Politically Correct Training Program

ISIS (1)Daily Caller, by Kerry Picket, June 17 2016:

WASHINGTON — A week after House Republicans and Democrats overwhelmingly passed a bill that reauthorizes the Department of Homeland Security’s controversial “Countering Violent Extremism” training, the committee that crafted the bill is holding a hearing next Thursday to ask how prepared DHS is.

The House Homeland Security Committee’s Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee is expected to have a hearing next Thursday asking how prepared DHS is to address terrorist threats.

CVE training, The Daily Caller previously reported in 2013, stresses personnel appease different cultural backgrounds. For example, under the section of being “sensitive to constitutional values,” it suggests, “Don’t use training that equates radical thought, religious expression, freedom to protest, or other constitutionally-protected activity, including disliking the U.S. government without being violent.”

In addition, the policy manual, which was created by an inter-agency working group from DHS and the National Counterterrorism Center, urges, “Trainers who equate the desire for Sharia law with criminal activity violate basic tenets of the First Amendment.”

DHS CRCL CVE Training – Dos and Donts

When asked by The Daily Caller what the intent of including CVE training in the bill, a House homeland committee aide said it was to “expand the number of people familiar with the material and specifically these three things that they have been doing for the last few years now, because there’s a very small team at the department that’s really active with the CVE.”

The aide added that travel makes up a large portion of their budget. And the genesis for the idea came from the notion that “generic training material community awareness briefings—those types of things, if more people were trained on them they would have a wider reach.”

The FBI found itself in a similar situation in 2011, when Justice Department’s subject matter experts deemed its training manual and several instructors culturally insensitive to Muslims. Both the materials and the instructors were purged from the agency. The agency adopted a CVE training policy thereafter.

TheDC asked House Speaker Paul Ryan on Thursday if the GOP is so concerned about law enforcement being unable to investigate subjects with Islamic backgrounds as a result of accusations of discrimination, then why Republicans overwhelmingly support the bill?

“I had concerns about this aspect of DHS and one of the reasons why we delayed the markup of the homeland security bill in the appropriations committee is because we wanted to look at all these issues to see if something needed to be improved through the appropriations process and that’s one of our concerns,” Ryan said.

Follow Kerry on Twitter

**

Also see:

Hey New York Times, Here’s What We Know About Orlando Killer’s Motive

new-york-times-orlando.sized-770x415xcPJ MEDIA, BY PATRICK POOLE, JUNE 16, 2016

A lot of digital ink has been spilled in recent days following the horrific terror attack early Sunday morning in Orlando. But within hours, a predictable media narrative began to take root as news of the killer’s jihadist motives became clearer. The media expressed uncertainty over whether he had been inspired by radical Islam.

The following day, this came from the New York Times:

So let’s help the <i>New York Times</i> and the establishment media find some clarity. Here’s a quick rundown of what we know about the killer’s motive:

  • In that Facebook post, he also raged against the “filthy ways of the West.”
  • He called local media during the attack, saying: “I did it for ISIS. I did it for the Islamic State.”
  • On the day of the 9/11 attacks, when his fellow high school students watched in horror as the second plane hit the World Trade Center towers, he “started jumping up-and-down cheering on the terrorist.”
  • In previous FBI investigations, according to FBI Director Comey, he had said: “[h]e hoped that law enforcement would raid his apartment and assault his wife and child so that he could martyr himself.”
  • A witness told the FBI that he had been watching videos of al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki “years ago.”
  • Law enforcement sources say that the killer was a disciple of local imam Marcus Robertson, aka Abu Taubah. Robertson was released from prison last year. He had previously served as bodyguard to convicted 1993 World Trade Center bombing leader, Blind Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman

That’s what the New York Times has to go on right now.

All that, according to the establishment media narrative, leaves the matter of motive “unclear.”

Now let’s see what information the FBI had, as the organization somehow also felt “unclear” on Mateen’s intentions prior to his attack.

The FBI has been quick to absolve itself of any responsibility for the largest terror attack in the U.S. since 9/11. And yet, as I noted here at PJ Media on the day of the attack, this incident is yet another case of what I have termed “Known Wolf” terrorism.

In this case, we don’t have a situation of missed “red flags.”

We have a willful ignoring of the 1,000,000 lumen spotlight shining on the terrorist killer:

As the investigation into the attack continues, there needs to be a corresponding investigation by Congress as to why these failures by the FBI and the national security establishment repeatedly continue to happen.

Also see:

Frank Gaffney: Obama’s Failure to ‘Grapple with the Reality’ of Sharia and Jihad is ‘Getting People Killed in America’

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Alex Wong/Getty Images

Breitbart, by John Hayward, June 15, 2016:

Frank Gaffney, founder of the Center for Security Policy, responded to President Obama and Hillary Clinton’s complaints about being forced to use the phrase “radical Islam” on Wednesday morning’s Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon.

Gaffney said that for all of Obama and Clinton’s efforts to minimize the importance of using the correct terminology for the enemy we face, the bigger problem is that “they don’t want to go anywhere near the underlying reality, which is that inherent in the sort of DNA of Islam, its adherence called sharia, is the root of this problem.”

“It’s the root of the problem with respect to killing homosexuals, it’s the root of the problem with respect to oppressing women, it’s the root of the problem with respect to genocide against Christians, killing Jews wherever they can, and apostates, on and on,” Gaffney said.

“And that is this idea that a brutally repressive, totalitarian doctrine has to rule the whole world, and jihad – which is another term they don’t want to use, and in fact they’ve got a new report out of their advisory group at the Department of Homeland Security that says, you know, you can’t use words like ‘sharia.’ You can’t use words like ‘jihad.’ You gotta focus on those ‘right-wing violent extremists. They’re the real problem,” he said.

“That’s what’s getting people killed in America – a failure to grapple with this reality. And I’m afraid Donald Trump is right that the President has exhibited, if not sympathy for the terrorists, certainly for the Islamic supremacists. And the documentation for that is certainly all over SecureFreedom.org, as well as what we talk about, day in and day out,” Gaffney declared, referring to the Center for Security Policy’s website.

On the matter of Islamic supremacism, Bannon asked Gaffney about former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s call for a congressional investigation into the threat.

“He referred, unfortunately, to a particular model that the anti-anti-communists managed to irradiate, the House Un-American Affairs Committee,” Gaffney said of Gingrich’s proposal. “I do think congressional oversight, congressional investigation, congressional efforts to hold the executive accountable, is absolutely essential.”

He said one of the reasons we’ve seen Obama and Clinton “responding so viciously to Donald Trump’s criticisms” is because “they are hugely vulnerable in this area, and a decent investigation by the Congress, accountability by the Congress, would expose this – and, I think, make it clear you don’t want, you can’t afford four more years of this stuff under a President Hillary Clinton.”

Bannon lamented that current House Speaker Paul Ryan undercut the points Trump and Gingrich sought to make. “What you guys want, and holding people accountable for this Islamic jihad, Islamic supremacism, the imposition of sharia law here in the United States of America – Paul Ryan says, ‘Nope, that’s not American values. You guys are haters, you guys are nativists.’” He asked Gaffney what his advice to Ryan would be.

“I had the chance to speak to one of his senior people last week, and I would say the same thing: you’ve got to get this right,” Gaffney responded. “It’s not just Paul Ryan. I’m sorry to say, a whole bunch of other people on the Republican side of the aisle, for most of the past fifteen years, have been getting this wrong too, I’d say starting with President George W. Bush.”

He said Bush made his famous “Religion of Peace” declaration after being subjected to “an intensive, highly successful political influence operation, and I believe it screwed up American foreign and national security policy, from his time to the present one.”

“Look, there are peaceful Muslims, no question about it. There are Muslims who don’t want to live under sharia any more than the rest of us do,” Gaffney declared. “I believe they can be our natural allies. But mistaking either their number, or their importance, or their standing against the authorities of Islam who say, ‘wait a minute, sharia is Islam, sharia is the way this has to be practiced’ is the height of folly, not just professional malfeasance.”

“This is a moment when we’ve got to understand that hundreds of millions of Muslims believe Islamic supremacism is God’s will, and they will engage in jihad – not just of the violent kind, Steve. They’ll do hijra, this migration, to expand the faith. They will use zakat, funding, material support if you will, for terrorism, to enrich and enable the jihad,” Gaffney warned.

“And, of course, they will do what the Muslim Brotherhood has been all about – we don’t even know they’re here for fifty years! They’ve been running what they call ‘civilization jihad’ against America, and it’s working. Part of why President Obama got it wrong, part of why President Bush got it wrong, why Republicans and Democrats in office have gotten it wrong, is the success of the Muslim Brotherhood in running influence operations that have obscure the true nature of sharia, and the jihad that it calls for,” he argued.

Gaffney declared that the Muslim Brotherhood is “absolutely a terrorist organization.”

“Its franchise Hamas is a designated terrorist organization. It aspires to use violence in the way of Allah, as its creed calls for. The federal government of the United States, under Republicans and Democrats, has repeatedly found it to be a terrorist organization. We need to designate it as such,” he urged, noting that Senator Ted Cruz – who Gaffney served as a national security adviser during his 2016 presidential campaign –  has co-sponsored legislation to that effect.

Bannon asked why only 80 Republicans in the House have signed on to the effort to designate the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, and asked why the other 252 Republicans were reluctant to do so.

“The bigger question is, why isn’t the State Department doing this right now?” Gaffney replied, pointing out that no new legislation would be required for them to do so.

As for the recalcitrant House Republicans, Gaffney said it goes back to Speaker Ryan: “If he doesn’t get what we’re up against, he’s not going to be supporting this legislation. One of the first things he could do, to show that he does get it, I believe would be to schedule this legislation that has been offered up, and has been now approved by the House Judiciary Committee, it is ready to go to the floor, to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization.”

“Get that floor time, get that vote. Demonstrate that Republicans do have a clue about the danger we’re facing, and are preparing to take responsible action,” Gaffney urged Ryan. “It’s what the public expects them to do. Look, we all, Republicans and Democrats, need them to do.”

Bannon rephrased that advice in somewhat stronger terms, saying Ryan should bring Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson and FBI Director James Comey before Congress to “keel-haul” them for security lapses that grow more obvious as each new detail of jihadi Omar Mateen leaks out through the media. He wondered how Ryan and his caucus could leave it up to media outlets like Breitbart News to hold the Administration accountable, when oversight is a clear duty of Congress.

“We need a serious investigation,” Gaffney agreed. “Those guys would claim, hey, wait a minute, we’re in the middle of an ongoing one with regard to this. The thing that needs to be investigated is how we got here.”

As a starting point for such an investigation, he recommended a book he co-authored with Center for Security Policy Vice-President Clare Lopez, See No Sharia: ‘Countering Violent Extremism’ and the Disarming of America’s First Lines of Defense.

He also recommended See Something, Say Nothing: A Homeland Security Officer Exposes the Government’s Submission to Jihad  by Philip Haney, also a recent guest on Breitbart News Daily.

“There’s plenty of evidence that what we’ve been doing is willful blindness to a threat that has been metastasizing by the day. That ought to be the object of these investigations. You’ll find, if you ask the FBI – certainly the agents, if not the leadership – have you been handcuffed by this willful blindness, have you been kept from doing your job? They have. So has the military. So has the intelligence community. So have the DHS law enforcement guys,” Gaffney said.

“It’s going to get more of us killed, if we don’t get this corrected,” he warned.

“Republicans ought to be in the lead, because this is one of their strong suits, or at least has been historically, national security. They’re not measuring up. They’re not stepping up. We need them to do it, and I think Donald Trump is – you know, with all of his faults, and there are some – he’s got this right,” he said. “We don’t need to import more jihadists. The American people understand that. We need to  stop the ones that are here as well – even, and most especially, really, those that are doing business as the Muslim Brotherhood.”

He warned that the Muslim Brotherhood is “stealthily, covertly subverting us from within,” and “creating the infrastructure that jihadists are using around the world, to do the violent jihad as well. It’s both that we need to address.”

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

Orlando Attack Is a Failure of Obama’s ‘Politically Correct’ Policy, Analysts Say

Family members wait for word from police after arriving down the street from a shooting involving multiple fatalities at a nightclub in Orlando, Fla. / AP

Family members wait for word from police after arriving down the street from a shooting involving multiple fatalities at a nightclub in Orlando, Fla. / AP

Washington Free Beacon, by Bill Gertz, June 14, 2016:

The Florida terrorist attack last weekend revealed multiple failures of Obama administration counterterrorism policies that critics say are hamstrung by liberal “political correctness.”

Security analysts said the attack exposed failures of the administration’s counterterrorism policies that were designed to separate Islam from the jihadist terrorism that continues to spread from the Middle East to Europe and now the United States.

The attack early Sunday by security guard Omar Mateen, 29, included a 911 call to police stating the mass shooting was conducted in support of the Islamic State terror group. A total of 49 people were killed at a crowded Orlando nightclub.

It was the worst mass shooting in American history and the deadliest terror attack since the September 11, 2001, strikes on New York City and Washington, D.C.

FBI Director James Comey defended the bureau despite the fact that agents first identified Mateen as a terror risk in May 2013 after a coworker alerted authorities that he had voiced sympathy for Islamic terrorists.

The tipoff showed that the Department of Homeland Security’s high-profile tip program, called “see something, say something” is not enough to prevent terrorist attacks.

The FBI gave up investigating Mateen after two interrogations. Mateen told agents he had made pro-terrorist comments because he felt he was a victim of religious discrimination from coworkers because he was Muslim.

“He admitted making the statements that his coworkers reported, but explained that he did it in anger because he thought his coworkers were discriminating against him and teasing him because he was Muslim. After ten months of investigation, we closed the preliminary investigation,” Comey said in Washington.

Former FBI Agent John Guandolo said the FBI mistakenly closed its investigation because it had no idea how to respond to jihadist threats because the bureau does not teach agents about Islamist doctrine, such as Sharia law, that is used as a guide for terrorist operations and activities.

“This investigation was closed because FBI leadership has systematically refused to look at and teach Sharia to its agents because it is getting its advice on Islam from Muslims who are hostile to us and our system of government,” Guandolo said.

Comey said the FBI would examine whether it should have handled the case differently. “So far, the honest answer is, I don’t think so,” he said.

Guandolo said the FBI director was wrong.

“Fifty Americans are dead, the FBI had the killer in their sights and let him go, and the FBI director is okay with this,” he said. “Not knowing something that is a requirement of your profession—like an FBI director not understanding that Sharia is the key to understanding the entire global war—is unprofessional.”

Comey said Mateen declared he was conducting the attack on behalf of the leader of ISIS, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi, and pledged his loyalty to the group during his 911 calls from the club.

Mateen also stated the nightclub murders were carried out in support of the two Islamists who carried out the 2013 bombing of the Boston Marathon that killed three people. He also was supporting a Florida terrorist who died carrying out a suicide bombing for the Syrian al Qaeda group Al Nusra Front.

Comey said the FBI was confused about Mateen’s motive because of his support for multiple groups, including the Iranian-backed Shiite terror group Hezbollah, the Sunni terror group al Qaeda, and its rival Sunni offshoot, the Islamic State.

“This is one of the more frightening comments, but it is a falsehood American intelligence officials have been regurgitating since 9/11,” Guandolo said.

“The lie in the government goes like this: ‘Sunni and Shia hate each other and don’t work together,’” he said. “That is wrong on so many practical levels.”

Radical Shiite Iran has supplied weapons and material to Sunni al Qaeda and the Muslim Brotherhood, also Sunni, in Iraq, he said.

“Mostly, these comments demonstrate the FBI director is fundamentally ignorant of basic facts about our enemy,” Guandolo said.

Sebastian Gorka, a counterterrorism specialist, also faulted the administration’s adoption of politically correct policies for the failures to prevent the Orlando massacre.

“Political correctness is endangering the lives of Americans,” said Gorka, the Gen. Horner distinguished chair of military theory at Marine Corps University.

“I have spoken to many law enforcement officers who are angry and not just frustrated that a political matrix and narrative is being forced upon them, and they are not allowed to speak accurately and truthfully about what the threat is and who the enemy is,” Gorka added.

The neighbors of San Bernardino terrorists who killed 14 people last year were cowed from fear of being labeled racists or “Islamophobes” and did not report the terrorist leanings of the two killers, Gorka noted.

“The age of political correctness should have died with the killer in Orlando,” Gorka said. “Sadly, with his statement yesterday, the president has perpetuated it and so the deadly fantasy endures.”

President Obama on Sunday made no reference to Islamic terrorism in his statement and instead suggested it was a hate crime directed against gays. The nightclub was frequented mainly by homosexuals.

On Monday, the president said “we’re going to have to grapple” with groups like ISIS that spread “perversions of Islam” on the internet.

In addition to missing the early danger posed by Mateen, the administration also failed to issue any public warning about possible Islamic State terrorist attacks during the Muslim observance of Ramadan that began earlier this month.

The Washington Free Beacon first reported June 3 that an Islamic State spokesman advocated in May for attacks by ISIS supporters to be carried out in the United States and Europe.

Retired Army Lt. Col. Joseph Myers, a former Defense Intelligence Agency analyst and counterterrorism expert, said U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies are operating under rules of engagement that prevent the preemption of terror attacks.

“The fact that as a matter of Obama administration policy they have purged any references to Islam, Islamic doctrines and tenets of war and jihad from the professional terrorism lexicon leaves the FBI, DHS, DoJ, and DoD from being intellectually and physically ready to act and operate to preempt these kinds of events in the homeland,” Myers said.

The purging of Islamic concepts has left American leaders and law enforcement agents confused about terrorists’ motives.

“Individual acts of jihad are a legitimate tenet of Islamic war doctrines that do not require specific sanction or outside terrorist group approval,” he said, noting that “leaderless jihad” is an established tenet for both al Qaeda and ISIS.

Myers said the Orlando attack was a “catastrophic failure” for the FBI and showed its policies, procedures, and resources are inadequate to the mission of homeland security.

“This has to change now or a new organization, mandated to defeat this domestic threat, must be organized and fielded,” he said.

The deadly terrorist attack was an immediate focus of presidential candidates.

Presumptive Republican nominee Donald Trump blamed politically correct policies for the failure to prevent the latest attack. He repeated his call to temporarily bar Muslims coming from areas of the world that have been linked to terrorism against the United Stats.

Trump said during a speech in New Hampshire that “the current politically correct response cripples our ability to talk and to think and act clearly.”

“We’re importing radical Islamic terrorism into the West through a failed immigration system and through an intelligence community held back by our president,” Trump said. “Even our own FBI director has admitted that we cannot effectively check the backgrounds of people we’re letting into America.”

The Obama administration has hamstrung intelligence and security agencies, the New York businessman said.

“They have put political correctness above common sense, above your safety, and above all else. I refuse to be politically correct,” Trump said.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the expected Democratic nominee, initially declined to link radical Islam to the Orlando attack. Later she acknowledged in broadcast interviews that jihadists were religiously motivated but she sought to play down that aspect of the threat.

Asked about Islam during a CNN interview, Clinton said: “Well, first of all, from my perspective, it matters what we do more than what we say, and it mattered we got Bin laden, not what name we called him.”

“I have clearly said whether you call it radical jihadism or radical Islamism, I’m happy to say either,” Clinton said, adding that she also would not “demonize, demagogue and declare war on an entire religion.”

“That plays right into ISIS’ hands,” she said. “This is something that we can call it radical jihadism, radical Islamism, but we also want to reach out to the vast majority of American Muslims and Muslims around this world to help us defeat this threat, which is so evil and has got to be denounced by everyone, regardless of religion.”

Clinton  said she supports increasing gun laws to regulate firearms after the Orlando massacre.

Mateen, before he was killed by police, was armed with an AR-15 rifle and a Glock handgun.

A Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman would not respond when asked why DHS did not issue any warnings about a possible ISIS attack during Ramadan.

Marsha Catron, the spokeswoman, said the department issued a national terrorism advisory in December that remains in place.

Since the Orlando shooting and the arrest of an armed man in Los Angeles, DHS notified state and local law enforcement “of all relevant threat information and to consider appropriate responses,” Catron said.

A DHS official said, “Lone offenders and self-directed attackers present a significant challenge to our public safety as there are often very limited opportunities to identify and disrupt their plots prior to violence.”

The official said that in more than 80 percent of cases involving what DHS calls “homegrown violent extremists” people close to the extremists had observed warning signs of radicalization.

***

Former FBI Instructor John Guandolo: FBI Has No Strategic Plan to Deal with Islamic Terror Threat: ‘Average Law Enforcement Officer Knows Less Than Citizens That Are Paying Attention’

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Joe Raedle/Getty Images

Breitbart, by John Hayward, June 1, 2016:

Former FBI agent, counter-terrorism instructor, and founder of UnderstandingTheThreat.com John Guandolo appeared on Monday morning’s edition of Breitbart News Daily with SiriusXM host Stephen K. Bannon to talk about the Orlando jihad attack.

Following up on a caller who wondered how the FBI could have interviewed shooter Omar Mateen three times without concluding he was a serious threat, Bannon asked Guandolo if the FBI counter-terrorist unit was “incompetent,” or “hamstrung” by political correctness.

“It’s a combination of both, actually,” Guandolo replied. “You’ve got the agents busting their butts on the street level, but you’ve got the leadership of the FBI who refuse to look at this strategically.”

“And it is because, on orders from the White House — I know even under Director Mueller’s tenure there, before Director Comey — they were forced to work with organizations like the Islamic Society of North America and others, Muslim Public Affairs Council, which are Hamas — Muslim Brotherhood organizations,” Guandolo charged.

He also mentioned CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, which he described as a “Hamas group.”

“They were created by the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestine Committee, which was Hamas in the United States, “ Guandolo explained. “So they’re not merely a Muslim Brotherhood group. Hamas is an inherent part of the Muslim Brotherhood, and CAIR was the full Hamas organization created in the United States.”

He said the government has not “identified the larger threat,” which is that “the teaching these guys are getting is all from the Islamic centers.”

“The majority, eighty-plus percent of the Islamic centers’ mosques in the United States are teaching this,” he said. “All of the major Islamic organizations, per evidence in the largest terrorism financing and Hamas trial in American history, demonstrates clearly that these groups are jihadi organizations.”

Guandolo said the FBI has a “responsibility to the nation to address the threat, regardless of the public outcry, or the political implications.”

“That’s their job. That’s the FBI’s job, and they have to do it, and the leadership has to get on board,” he insisted. “Nowhere in the FBI is there a room at headquarters where six people sit with a whiteboard and think strategically about this threat.”

He said this was partially because “there are fires every day — in other words, they’re running around putting out fires from all the threats that are coming in, and the problem is, just like the Director himself has publicly said, they have over a thousand open cases on guys like this guy, Omar Mateen, and the regulations that have been put on them since 9/11 hamstring them.”

Guandolo said there have been some “tough questions” asked by congressional oversight committees, but “nothing has been done.” His recommendation for reform begins with understanding that “the primary work for understanding the threat that we do is at the state and local level.”

“The federal level has demonstrated that there is no strategic understanding of this threat, of the Islamic threat,” he declared, repeating that there was no grand strategy under consideration by our $4.2 trillion government. “That’s why we’re losing the war… we crushed the enemy on the battlefield in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our military did what they were supposed to do. The soldiers, the Marines, the sailors, the airmen, they did their job. And yet, we came away with losses in Afghanistan and Iraq, because we didn’t understand the enemy. We don’t understand that they don’t intend to win the war with guns and blowing themselves up, but that that’s a tactic in a much larger strategy.

“And yet, they came away defeating us in Iraq and Afghanistan, despite the fact that we crushed them on the battlefield, because the average four-star general, the average senator, the average head of the intelligence agency, pick which one — at the federal level has not a clue about the strategic workings, and inner workings, the doctrine, the sharia, that drives every one of these guys.”

He warned against underestimating “the catastrophic failure of our leadership at the federal level.”

“My experience in training and teaching federal agents, state law enforcement, local law enforcement all over the country, thousands of them — the average law enforcement officer knows less than citizens that are paying attention,” Guandolo said. “I can talk about that objectively, because we share a questionnaire when we start the training. I mean, the knowledge level is zero. The lower you go – in other words, federal, state, local – there’s a higher chance at the local level that a local police officer will have a better understanding of the problem than an FBI counter-terrorism agent.”

He recommended an article posted at his UnderstandingTheThreat.com website about “how bad it’s going to be, and unfortunately, what happened in Orlando is nothing compared to what is coming our way.”

“The Islamic movement has been focused, since prior to 9/11, on primarily the Islamic world. They’ve been focused, as you’ve seen, in Syria, and in Libya, in eastern Africa, in the Middle East. They’ve been focused on getting Islamic countries to adhere to sharia and begin imposing sharia outside of its borders,” Guandolo explained, referring to the Islamic legal code.

“That’s the focus. What we’re watching right now is the turn toward the West,” he said, citing terrorist attacks popping up in the U.S., Canada, and Europe, which have all been “individual acts of jihad,” until now.

“What you’re gonna see is, multiply Orlando, and Beslan, and Mumbai – and, by the way, since they’re working with the Marxist-socialist collaborators like Black Lives Matter and others, many Soros-funded groups and other groups, you’re gonna see a national level, where the violence will raise significantly, and you’ll see things precipitated by other events,” Guandolo warned.

Breitbart News Daily airs on SiriusXM Patriot 125 weekdays from 6:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. Eastern.

Did FBI Training Material Purge Cause Agency To Drop The Ball On Orlando Shooter?

Orlando Law Enforcement Press Conference on Nightclub shooter (screen capture NBC2)

Orlando Law Enforcement Press Conference on Nightclub shooter (screen capture NBC2)

Daily Caller, by Kerry Picket, June 13, 2016:

Could the FBI’s purge of training material relating to Islamic terrorism have led to the agency dropping the ball on Florida nightclub shooter Omar Mateen?

Mateen, who called 911 and pledged his allegiance to ISIS Saturday night, killed 50 and wounded dozens of others at a gay nightclub in Orlando was interviewed by the FBI for possible links to terrorism multiple  times.

The FBI was the target of criticism when it was found that no action was taken when it was discovered that  2013 Boston bombers Tamerlan and Dzokhar Tsarnaev were known to the FBI, when Russia sent a warning out about them.

Additionally, 2012 Fort Hood shooter Major Nidal Hassan was never investigated by the FBI, a report said, because of political correctness.

Dr. Sebastian Gorka, a counter-terrorism expert, told “Fox & Friends” Sunday morning about a recent experience he had with a staffer from the Obama administration’s Homeland Security office in which he briefed a Midwest police force about radical Islamic terrorism.

“I spent 8 hours with a Midwest police force—250 officers teaching them about jihad—and helping them understand about al Qaeda and the Islamic faith,” Gorka said.

“After 8 hours of talking to them a young woman walks up from the Obama administration from the Department of Homeland Security and says, ‘Look Dr. Gorka, that’s all very interesting, but I disagree with all of it because the primary threat to Americans is white supremacists.’”

A law enforcement source told The Daily Beast they declared Mateen a “person of interest” while an active investigation went on about him. The agency opened files on Mateen, whose parents are from Afghanistan, in 2013 and 2014, but felt there was nothing the FBI could follow up on.

“He’s a known quantity,” the law enforcement source said. “He’s been on the radar before.”

However, the FBI’s training on handling possible Islamic terror suspects was turned upside down five years ago, when the Obama administration began a purge of training material that would remove references to Islam that Muslim subject matter experts, hired by the Justice Department, found offensive.

By May 2012, the FBI was criticized for purging such material and denied that it had created its own politically correct counter-terrorism dictionary after Patrick Poole at PJ Media produced the document showing the FBI’s official lexicon.

Texas Republican Rep. Louie Gohmert, during a floor speech, also mentioned the “disappearing language” since the 9/11 Commission Report was published, which, unlike the FBI 2009 lexicon, referenced “Islam,” “jihad,” “Muslim,” etc.

Follow Kerry on Twitter

Robert Spencer’s travels being monitored by the government?

right-wing-extremist.sized-770x415xt

The hypothesis that a “right-wing extremist” identification now qualifies someone as a U.S. travel risk is not as preposterous as it might seem at first glance.

Is the U.S. Government Now TRACKING ‘Right-Wing Extremists’? PJ Media, by Robert Spencer, May 10, 2016:

Is the Obama administration keeping tabs on “right-wing extremists”?

This question comes up because I’ve been informed that someone certainly is keeping tabs on me.

It started last summer. I don’t consider myself a “right-wing extremist” — but the far-Left Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) does, and the FBI uses the SPLC as a resource. Since then, every time I fly — and I fly almost weekly – I can’t check in online. I am always directed to go to the airline counter.

There — as soon as I present my identification — the trouble starts. It generally proceeds like this:

  • The clerk types a great deal, frowns at the screen, types some more, asks me what my middle name is, types still more, looks at me quizzically, and gets on the phone.
  • They’re very secretive about these calls, sometimes even moving to a different desk to make them. They refuse to tell me anything about them afterward, including who they called or why.
  • The call usually takes around ten minutes. The whole process takes fifteen or twenty minutes. Then I am checked in and allowed to go to my gate.

After these long, unexplained delays — which had never occurred prior to last summer — happened to me five or six times consecutively, I asked an FBI agent of my acquaintance about it, and he kindly agreed to look into it. A few days later he told me that the strange delays weren’t about me, but about someone else: as it happened, he said, someone on some watch list or other is named Robert Spencer and shares my birthdate.

Hmm.

He said the FBI wasn’t watching me, and as far as he knew, no other government agency was either. But shortly thereafter, an airline clerk gave me a strong indication that what the FBI agent had told me was untrue.

After the clerk finished the long, mysterious phone call, he told me he was breaking the rules to tell me the following: the person on the other end had asked if I was planning on traveling to the UK.

I was not — because the UK has actually banned me from traveling there for the crime of noting that Islam has doctrines calling for violence against unbelievers.

Another time, a different clerk broke the rules again. He told me that the mysterious person he called had remarked: “He sure travels a lot.” Notably, he did not say anything that might confirm what the FBI agent had told me, like, say: “Let him go, that’s not the same Robert Spencer.”

Read more

Material Support: An Indispensable Counterterrorism Tool Turns 20

DOJ-sealWar on the Rocks, by JEFF BREINHOLT, April 19, 2016:

A few years back, there were plenty of American conservatives who publicly sneered at the notion that terrorism was anything short of a military problem. We should not treat terrorists as criminals, they argued, because that was somehow soft-headed. The problem with their argument was that it could not tell us how to handle American citizens in the United States who plot to attack the homeland. Gitmo? Not likely, and we cannot call the U.S. Air Force in to bomb Chicago if we find terrorists operating there. Kinetic options simply do not exist for certain American counterterrorism situations.

We need the U.S. criminal justice system to be able to handle terrorists because terrorists are sometimes Americans, who sometimes operate domestically, even if they are taking orders or inspiration from abroad. Fortunately 20 years ago today, the United States revolutionized this capability. The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA) was enacted on April 19, 1996 to coincide with the one-year anniversary of the Oklahoma City attack. It contained two key international terrorism provisions that were buried in one of those now-controversial Clinton crime bills. It amended the U.S. Criminal Code to add the following provision:

§ 2339B. Providing material support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations

(a) Prohibited activities. –

(1) Unlawful conduct. – Whoever, within the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, knowingly provides material support or resources to a foreign terrorist organization, or attempts or conspires to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. …

Meanwhile, the AEDPA amended the Immigration and National Act to create a system in which the State Department officially designates, for all the world to see, a list of subnational foreign terrorist organizations that meet the definition of “foreign terrorist organization” (FTO).

I took more than a passing interest in these provisions. I joined what was then known as the Terrorism and Violent Crime Section at the Department of Justice in March 1997, and became part of a small group of prosecutors looking at how to make terrorist financing cases. I eventually was placed in charge of the unit of lawyers dedicated to making “material support” cases. Our focus was on United States-based fundraisers for FTOs, which is to say white collar criminals.

It took some time for these provisions to gain some traction. For one, they did not become fully operational until October 8, 1997, when Secretary Albright publicly announced the first round of FTOs, consisting of 29 groups. Even then and despite our best efforts, we did not see many prosecutions. The Department of Justice obtained charges against a group of Mujahedeen-e-Khalq (MEK) financial supporters in Los Angeles, but this prosecution quickly got bogged down in pre-trial constitutional litigation. In Michigan, prosecutors obtained an indictment of a Hizballah procurement officer, but he quickly disappeared across the Windsor Bridge.

Unfortunately, it took 9/11 to shake us out of our inaction. The USA PATRIOT Act’s two most important provisions finally permitted the full sharing of information between agents involved in intelligence operations and their counterparts on the law enforcement side; these limits were previously believed to be necessary to protect ongoing surveillance authorized by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). When terrorism prosecutors first saw the type of intelligence the FBI had been collecting on U.S.-based terrorist operatives, there was dancing in the halls of Main Justice. “Material support” prosecutions began to proliferate. Terrorism prosecutors finally had something to put their teeth into. Suddenly, there was an end-game to the FBI’s spadework.

Something else happened around that time: the U.S. military overran a Taliban camp in Afghanistan and, in the process, detained a young American named John Walker Lindh. We quickly realized that he could not be charged with the most obvious crime — treason — because the U.S. Constitution required two witnesses to each of his treasonous acts. Instead, prosecutors obtained an indictment against him under § 2339B, based on the theory that he was attempting to provide “personnel” (his own body) to al Qaeda, an FTO.

At the time, it was far from clear that “personnel” within the definition of “material support or resources” included one’s own person. Lindh’s family got good lawyers who traveled from California to Virginia and filed a motion to dismiss, which argued that “personnel” did not include one’s own body. Prosecutors did not have much to say. After all, there was very little in the way of legislative history to inform the question. They resorted to arguing dictionary meanings.

Judge T.S. Ellis III took the matter under advisement. When he returned to the bench, he announced his conclusion that “personnel” within the definition of “material support or resources” did indeed include one’s own person.

This might seem like small potatoes, but it was a watershed event for §2339B enforcement and counterterrorism cases, just as much as the PATRIOT Act information-sharing changes. I remember being stunned at the time, realizing that we might have hit the jackpot. For the first time, American prosecutors could obtain indictments of people who sought to perform services for FTOs, on the theory that they were attempting to provide “personnel.” This development gave us the Lackawanna defendants, the Portland jihad cell, and the Virginia Paintball group. Section 2339B was the closest thing our prosecutors have to specifying the crime of “being a terrorist,” an offense that otherwise does not exist. A few years after the Lindh decision, Congress amended the definition of “material support or resources” to clarify the term “personnel,” which is now defined as “one or more person who may be or include oneself.” Section 2339B became more than just a white collar crime. It could be used to incapacitate bomb-throwers as well.

Where has the “material support” crime taken us in the 20 years it has existed? As noted, §2339B prosecutions began to proliferate after 9/11 and the PATRIOT Act. There have been over 300 individuals charged with “material support crimes,” compared to only a handful before 9/11. That is an amazing trajectory. It is an indispensable counterterrorism tool and one that does not involve the military. The Department of Justice has successfully prosecuted supporters of al Qaada, Hamas, Hizballah, FARC, AUC, al Shabaab, and the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) for a variety of roles in the terrorist support enterprise. Most new terrorism indictments you read about these days include a “material support” charge. We were assisted by the FBI, which created the Terrorist Financing Operations Section (TFOS) after 9/11.

Today, the American approach to criminalizing terrorism is the envy of our foreign partners. Under the “attempt” provision to §2339B, we can arrest aspiring ISIL foreign fighters before they leave for Turkey, on the theory that they are attempting to provide “personnel” to an FTO. These cases, which are on the rise, typically involve a heavy dose of social media exploitation which allows American prosecutors to argue that the travelers intended to join ISIL, plus an affirmative act — like buying a plane ticket or traveling to the airport. For countries that are grappling with the dilemma of how to stop their nationals from fighting in Syria and coming home as threats, the U.S. “material support” statute is the gold standard. With it, we do not have to wait until Americans are caught on the battlefield in Syria.

Over the last several years, the material support crime has been amended to make it more powerful. In 2004, for example, several bases of extraterritorial jurisdiction were placed in it. Prosecutors can now prosecute § 2339B defendants who have never set foot in the U.S. before their arrest and extradition. Penalties have increased.

Of course, one of the signs that a law enforcement tool is powerful is how many people come out of the woodwork and complain about it. These arguments ultimately went to the Supreme Court, which ruled 6–3 that the material support regime was constitutional.

So here we are, 20 years later. Happy Birthday, § 2339B. May there be many happy returns.

Jeff Breinholt is an attorney in the National Security Division of the U.S. Department of Justice in Washington, DC. He is a member of the State Bar of California. The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Department of Justice or the United States.