Posts

Open Letter to Marine Corps Recruiting Command: Time to Arm our Military Recruiters

Commanding General
Marine Corps Recruiting Command
Marine Corps Base Quantico
3280 Russell Road, 2nd Floor
Quantico, Va. 22134

Dear Lieutenant General Mark Andrew Brilakis,

Many thanks for your service to our nation, I will not bloviate on how critical recruiting quality men and women is to the defense of our nation. I understand how important this is to you.

You and our U.S. Marines are at the tip of the spear. I spent over 3 years as a Special Programs/Officer Programs Recruiter in New Mexico. Our headquarters was in Phoenix, AZ. I recruited folks out of the desert, sent them to Officer Candidate School and then the U.S. Navy trained them. Many are still serving today.

In regards to the loss of life at your recruiting station in Tennessee. I send my deepest sympathies to you, the U.S. Marine Corps recruiting command and the families of Gunnery Sgt. Thomas Sullivan, from Springfield, Mass., Lance Cpl. Skip “Squire” Wells, of Marietta, Ga., Sgt. Carson Holmquist, of Grantsburg Wisc. and Staff Sgt. David Wyatt, of Chattanooga.

chattanoogashooting2

Note the “Gun Free Zone” sign on the bullet riddled glass door to the Chattanooga Marine Corps. Recruiting Station office.

It was during the presidency of George H.W. Bush that the U.S. Department of Defense issued a directive in February 1992 affecting the carrying of firearms on bases by military personnel. That directive was eventually implemented through a regulation 190-14 issued by the Department of the Army in March 1993, two months after President Clinton assumed office.

I urge you to disregard all unconstitutional directives and regulations and arm up your men and women as the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution allows. These men and women are on the front line recruiting those who are willing to die for our Constitutional Republic. They too deserve and have an unalienable right to protect themselves from the likes of Mohammed Youssef Abdulazeez as they go about their mission critical daily duties.

This would have helped prevent the Fort Hood shootings by Islamist ‘Soldier of Allah’ Major Nidal Hassan who was ignored by his chain-of-command out of fear of being called racist Islamophobes. It would also have prevented the June 1, 2009 attack on a Little Rock U.S. Army Recruitment Center by Carlos Bledsoe, a.k.a. Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, who killed Pvt. William “Andy” Long and severely injured Pvt. Quinton Ezeagwula.

No more! ARM UP Sir…. lock and load.

Every single recruiting office under your command must be protected. If you get blow back I suggest you send those who disagree a copy of the U.S. Constitution.

I will copy this email to all my friends who are currently recruiters and they will arm themselves, sir. They will not be left out in the cold like turkeys while cold blooded Islamic Muslim fascists are running rampant across this nation with no fear of apprehension or prosecution from those currently sitting in the White House, the people’s house.

Write up a Commanding General Directive to arm all your recruiters immediately. Disregard all unconstitutional directives and regulations that came out of the White House under former Presidents George H.W. Bush and William Jefferson Clinton.

Very respectfully,

Senior Chief Geoff Ross
Surface Warfare – Air Warfare
U.S. Navy (Retired)
Navarre, Florida

VIDEO: Lieutenant Colonel Allen B. West, U.S. Army (Ret.) calls on President Obama to end “Gun-Free Zones” at Military Facilities NOW!

July 4th and the Unknown Unknowns

The heightened terrorism concerns around the July 4th holiday weekend are troubling. The evolving terror threat in the United States is metamorphosing into one where the greatest concerns are from what former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld calls the “unknown unknowns.” Although some pundits panned Rumsfeld for the statement, he was accurate in his diagnosis of the problem.

The older terror models constructed around operational cells, taking orders from a terrorist central-command, are the “known unknowns”, and they still present a clear and present danger. But the difference with these types of threats is that we are aware of many of these groups, many of their affiliated groups, and are currently pursuing an investigative and intelligence gathering strategy to destroy them and their plans.

With self-radicalized terrorists we have a number of challenging “unknown unknowns” investigative and intelligence gathering obstacles which differ from the terror-cell model. Obstacle number one is, we don’t know who these people are? Many of these individuals can learn the tools of the terror trade, and can absorb terrorist propaganda, using nothing more than a keyboard and an Internet connection. This solitary radicalization leaves behind few investigative breadcrumbs because the individual’s limited interaction with others in the terror arena limits the potential for detection and pre-attack mitigation as he crosses paths with the “known” terrorists being tracked and monitored.

Obstacle number two is the self-radicalized terrorist’s tendency to default to simple, yet deadly, attacks using homemade explosives or small arms. Homemade, simple explosive devices can be made by following instructions on the open Internet and by acquiring easily acquired chemicals. Absent any additional surreptitious behavior, the purchase of these easily accessible items is unlikely to arouse suspicion. Again, leaving behind few investigative breadcrumbs. These simple attacks also require little, if any, training. Training requires contacts and actions which can all leave behind a trail of evidence and learning to pull the trigger of a firearm or to remotely depress a detonator device doesn’t require a significant investment of time or energy.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the Conservative Review. The featured image is by Carolyn Kaster/AP.

Are Fake Virus Warnings a New Method to Disrupt Free Speech?

This has been driving me nuts: Avast, an Anti-Virus product that I have in the past recommended, has been flagging JihadWatch.org as having malware, with warnings such as “Infection Blocked,” “Avast WebShield has blocked a harmful web page or file,” and “A threat has been detected.” Of course, this is not true. There is no virus.

avastI first got notification of the issue last week. As it happens, I’ve seen it a couple of times before; in fact, AVG, another anti-virus company, followed Avast and also started flagging JihadWatch.org, but a simple email asking them to look again was sufficient to get them to correct their signatures and apologise for getting it wrong.

McAfee has no issue with Jihad Watch:

http://www.siteadvisor.com/sites/www.jihadwatch.org?ref=safe&locale=en-US

Neither does Norton:

https://safeweb.norton.com/report/show?url=www.jihadwatch.org

Or WOT:

https://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/www.jihadwatch.org

Or any of the other 63 malware scanning sites listed here.

Avast has been sent dozens of complaints. Most received a response, although I did not. They even admit that there is no malware in a few of the responses. Here is one:

Hello X,

Thank you for contacting Avast.

…Once they stop using useless obfuscation, it will not be blocked (it is the obfuscation that is being detected, not the actual deobfuscated code!) .

Thank you

Best regards

Richard Šrank

Avast Technical Support Specialist

That “obfuscation” he is talking about is the Counter DDoS prevention code that JihadWatch.org uses. It’s essential to keep the site available, as we are literally seeing tens of millions of attacks every day. Obviously we need to stay one step ahead. Yet Avast is saying that we should remove that protective code, and then they will stop saying we have malware, even though they know we don’t have malware in the first place. Apart from the sheer lunacy of this demand, one has to question their honesty and competence in checking anything: if they can say something is unsafe when they know it isn’t and admit that they know, how can anyone be sure that when they say something is safe that it really is?

ddos-encodedb64Now about this code. I won’t post it here as text, as we know they will flag that also, but any competent developer can tell there is nothing malicious there. It’s no secret. It’s simple base64 encoding, easily decoded, not that it will mean much. The point is, it’s easy to see it’s not malicious. It’s easy for Avast to add a signature to their scanners even if they did see this scary “obfuscation.” Their choice of words is interesting: when script is “encoded” for good reason, as this is, we just call it “encoded,” not obfuscation, as developers can easily decode it to see the real code behind it, using any number of tools.

So is this sheer incompetence on Avast’s part or another method to disrupt free speech? I can’t tell, but in the meantime, please report these false positives to Avast at avast.com, choosing report false virus alert, and let any of your friends know that JihadWatch.org is not infected in any way. Those who encounter Avast’s virus alert should click ignore, which is sometimes an option, or switch to a more reliable Anti-Virus solution (it should be noted that although AVG got it wrong initially, they were quick to correct their mistake).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Strategies of Denial Revisited (Part I)

UK cops knew Muslim rape gangs were targeting schools 5 years ago, did nothing

Crisis in Israel: The Islamic State Attacks Druze Village

As we have been preaching for quite a while, any number of situations in Israel can ignite a regional war, with Israel in the center.

Possibly, we may be facing just such a situation in that the Islamic State (formerly ISIS) is now making deadly advances against the Syrian Druze community and threatening their existence. In that there is a significant Israeli Druze community in the Golan right next to the Syrian Druze community this geopolitical development has only bad consequences for both Israel and America.

Tune in as we speak to Israelis on the ground and get an up-to-the-minute status report on what could erupt into war at any moment.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Clear Channel runs ad praising Muhammad, refuses ad criticizing Muhammad

New York: Muslim in Islamic State jihad plot tries to stab an FBI agent

Muslim clerics: Those who insult Muhammad have “no right to live”

New York City: Another Muslim arrested in Islamic State plot investigation

Islamic State in Sudan: “We are here for the sake of Allah”

New Zealand: “Allahu akbar, I’m going to kill you, motherf***er”

Muslim student arrested for Islamic State NYC jihad mass murder plot

Saleh “denied sympathizing with Islamic State and granted them permission to examine his computer, authorities said. Investigators found the computer contained Islamic State propaganda, according to court filings.” War is deceit, as Muhammad said.

In any case, the glib dismissal by Western authorities of the Islamic State as having nothing to do with Islam fails to explain why Muslims such as Saleh are attracted to it. And so it does nothing to counter that attraction. This willful ignorance and denial is only endangering Americans, as it prevents the formulation of a realistic strategy to counter the Islamic State’s appeal.

“U.S. arrests New York man for Islamic State-inspired bomb plot,” by Joseph Ax and Nate Raymond, Reuters, June 16, 2015:

NEW YORK (Reuters) – U.S. authorities have accused a New York City college student of plotting to set off a pressure cooker bomb in the city in support of the militant group Islamic State, according to court documents made public on Tuesday.

Munther Omar Saleh, 20, was arrested early on Saturday morning after he and another man got out of their car and ran toward a surveillance vehicle that had been tracking their movements, according to documents filed in federal court in Brooklyn.

A defense lawyer for Saleh could not be identified on Tuesday. The other man, who was also arrested, was not named in the court documents and could not immediately be identified.

U.S. authorities have charged a number of so-called “lone wolf” plotters in recent months who have apparently been inspired by Islamic State, and authorities have said they are pursuing similar cases in all 50 states.

A federal agent said in court papers that Saleh, a resident of the New York City borough of Queens, spent hours online researching how to build a pressure cooker bomb and reading accounts of the deadly 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.

In numerous online postings, Saleh expressed support for the Islamic State and at one point posted on Twitter, in an apparent reference to the militant group Al Qaeda, “I fear AQ could be getting too moderate,” according to court papers.

He also praised various militant attacks, including the January massacre at the headquarters of the magazine Charlie Hebdo in France and murders carried out by Islamic State, authorities said.

A police officer observed Saleh on successive days in March on foot at the George Washington Bridge, which connects New Jersey and New York, seemingly looking around, the court papers said.

The behavior prompted officers to interview Saleh, who denied sympathizing with Islamic State and granted them permission to examine his computer, authorities said. Investigators found the computer contained Islamic State propaganda, according to court filings.

Saleh is studying at a college that specializes in aeronautics, the court papers said.

The complaint filed against Saleh mentions a third unnamed co-conspirator but does not say an arrest has been made….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Kurdistan: A Summary

Third Muslim arrested in jihad attack on AFDI Garland free speech event

UK Muslim family believed to have fled to Syria very devout, held Qur’an classes

UK: Word “Muslim” associated more with terrorism than anything else

Another Muslim arrested in Boston jihad plot targeting cops and Pamela Geller

This makes three jihadis dead and two in custody for trying to murder Pamela Geller. Does anyone really think that these men would have lived peaceful and productive lives were it not for our Muhammad cartoon exhibit? Does anyone really think they were so “provoked” by that event that it led them to discard their former “moderation”? Does anyone really think that any of them would not have struck elsewhere, and tried to murder other people, had we not staged the event?

“RI Man Arrested In Connection With Boston Terror Investigation,” CBS News, June 11, 2015 (thanks to Pamela Geller):

BOSTON (CBS) – A Warwick, Rhode Island man has been arrested in connection with an alleged terror plot in Boston. The FBI says 24-year-old Nicholas Rovinski was arrested Thursday night.

The charges against Rovinski will be revealed when he appears in Federal Court in Boston on Friday.

Rovinski is the third man named in connection with the investigation. Authorities searched his home on Aspinet Drive in Warwick after the fatal shooting of Usaamah Rahim June 2 in Boston’s Roslindale neighborhood.

Officials say they tried to question Rahim after they intercepted a message suggesting he planned to carry out an attack on police officers. Rahim allegedly talked about beheading anti-Muslim blogger Pamela Geller before deciding to target police.

It’s “anti-Muslim” now to stand for the freedom of speech, you see.

Authorities say Rahim, David Wright of Everett, and a third person met on a beach in Rhode Island to discuss their plans. Wright was arrested the same day Rahim was shot and killed….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel: Muslims assault Holocaust survivors

Fifth man charged in New York in Islamic State recruitment plot

After Pamela Geller is Silenced, Who’s Next?

Pennsylvania school officials schooled on Islam at mosque, at taxpayer expense

Pamela Geller: “The jihadists aren’t just coming for me, they are coming for all of us that believe in freedom.”

She is right, of course, not that Hollywood is on the case: Hollywood wouldn’t dare make a film that depicted Islamic jihadists honestly and accurately. She also says a great deal more that is on-point and important about the freedom of speech and more in this interview. “Pamela Geller: Hollywood Is “In the Pocket” of Jihadists (Q&A),” by Paul Bond, Hollywood Reporter, June 9, 2015 (thanks to Steve):

Pamela Geller has been on a rampage against radical Islam for years, beginning notably in 2010 by spearheading of the opposition to what she called the “Ground Zero Mega Mosque” near the site of the destroyed World Trade Center. Her most recent controversy was the organization of a “Draw the Prophet Muhammad” contest in Texas.

A “rampage.” How ridiculous. Islamic jihadists have been on a rampage against free people. Pamela Geller is resisting them — and the Hollywood Reporter says she is the one on the rampage.

At the event, two self-described jihadists shot a security guard before police killed them. Then, on June 2, police killed a knife-wielding Muslim man in Boston whose goal was allegedly to behead Geller in retaliation for the contest. Even though the contest was a major news story, few media outlets published the winning cartoon. Geller’s group, American Freedom Defense Initiative, put the image on billboards, 100 of which debuted in St. Louis on Monday with the tagline “Support Free Speech.” She spoke toThe Hollywood Reporter about how the (largely hostile) media is portraying these events.

Why are you being overly provocative, purposely insulting Muslims?

I am not being overly provocative or purposely insulting Muslims. Islamic jihadists, not I, made Muhammad cartoons the flash point for the defense of the freedom of speech when they began killing over them. If we don’t stand against them on that point, the only alternative is surrender and submission. I did not make the cartoons a flash point, the jihadis did.

But if you just don’t insult their prophet, they’ll leave you alone, no?

No. The death penalty for insulting Muhammad is just one aspect of Sharia. There is much, much more of infidel behavior that violates Sharia. If we refrain from drawing Muhammad, more demands to adhere to other aspects of Sharia will follow. Millions are suffering or have been slaughtered under Islamic Sharia law in Muslim countries. Islamic supremacists mean to impose it in the West.

Why shouldn’t cartoons insulting a religion be regarded as hate speech instead of protected free speech?

There is no hate speech exception to the First Amendment. “Hate speech” is a subjective judgment. If it were outlawed, the authority with the power to decide what constitutes it would have the power to control the public debate.… If a group will not bear being offended without resorting to violence, that group will rule unopposed while everyone else lives in fear, while other groups curtail their activities to appease the violent group. This results in the violent group being able to tyrannize the others. Cartoons have been used as satire since the beginning of satire — especially in our country — and no one gets a pass. Not the Pope of Rome, president of the United States or Hollywood’s biggest movie stars.… If you don’t like it, don’t look at it, boycott the network that airs it, don’t buy the publication, make counter-images, make a million, fine, but you have to adjust to us, not we to you, and if that’s too much, don’t come here. Threaten violence? Commit violence? The consequences are yours to bear.

It seems many media pundits who claim allegiance to the First Amendment aren’t persuaded by your arguments.

They are afraid of being killed by Islamic jihadists and camouflage their fear and cowardice as “respect” for Islam and Muslims.

Are there any TV hosts who have been particularly hostile to you during interviews?

Yes. Martha MacCallumErin BurnettAlisyn CamerotaChris Cuomo — although he let me speak and make my case.

How about behind your back?

Yes. Bill O’Reilly and Laura Ingraham. They said I was insulting the entire religion, one held by our moderate allies such as Egypt and Qatar. They are wrong in assuming that we must submit to Sharia to placate moderates, rather than that moderates need to accept the freedom of speech. Roman Catholics don’t like their religion mocked or the mockery of other religions, but Roman Catholics don’t kill when their religion is mocked — and so no one talks about “provoking” them or “respecting” them. In any pluralistic society, we have to put up with being offended and even with our core beliefs being mocked. Roman Catholics have learned that. Mormons and others have learned that — look at The Book of Mormon on Broadway. Why must we condescend to Muslims and think they cannot learn that? It’s the low expectation of soft bigotry.

So this isn’t entirely a partisan issue where conservatives stand by you and liberals don’t?

No. Chris Hayes stuck up for me on MSNBC. This is not a left/right split, it is a free person/slave split.

Did any TV host say something that struck you as particularly wrongheaded?

They all say I have the right to draw Muhammad but shouldn’t out of respect. They don’t seem to realize that any surrender on this point will only be seen by the jihadists as a victory and embolden them to make more demands. CNN’s Erin Burnett said I relished being the target of a beheading. It’s madness. Who self-promotes to get killed?

So you’re not purposely courting danger, as Burnett and others have insinuated?

Of course not. I love life. But I will not live as a slave.

Are there any TV hosts you’d like to face off with but who won’t have you on?

Bill O’Reilly. I expect he knows he would be shown up.

We know about the man arrested who intended to behead you. Any other threats you can share?

I have received many threats. The FBI and NYPD are aware of them and on the case.

Anyone in Hollywood reach out to you to offer support?

No.

Should Hollywood care about threats against you?

They may think they’re exempt, but they aren’t. Islamic supremacists will be demanding they adhere to Sharia as well. Of course, most producers already are careful not to show anything that might offend Muslims, including accurate representations of jihad plotting and activity, so Hollywood is mostly already in their pocket. But this is their issue, and the entertainment industry should be on the front lines in the information battle space. The jihadists aren’t just coming for me, they are coming for all of us that believe in freedom.

So why do you think Hollywood, which routinely claims to push the envelope in its art, hasn’t supported you?

They’re afraid of being ostracized.

Your “Draw Muhammad” event certainly got a lot of news coverage. Should mainstream media outlets have published the winning cartoon?

Every media outlet should publish the Muhammad cartoons. They can’t kill us all. By kowtowing to violent intimidation, they are inviting more of it. Instead, they should be showing that we will all stand together for free speech. If the media had published the Danish cartoons back in 2005, this would never have become an issue. The submission by media, entertainment and academic elites empowered the savages.

The Southern Poverty Law Center included you on their list of “hate groups.” Are they right?

Of course not. They’re the hate group, using that label to demonize and stigmatize all who don’t share their hard-left agenda. The SPLC smear machine does [not] profile jihad groups, but they target and libel patriots, veterans, Tea Party organizations and other groups that work in defense of freedom. They named [Republican presidential contender] Ben Carson as a hate group. That should tell you everything you need to know about them. Their [sympathizers] have violently attacked family groups, and one tried to assassinate Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. And a few months back an SPLC [sympathizer] killed three Muslims in a parking dispute in North Carolina.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Pakistani publication worries Islam’s image tarnished by CAIR rep’s pedophilia arrest

Egypt: Jihad suicide bomber attacks Luxor temple tourist site

Australia PM: Only effective defense against terror persuading people God doesn’t demand death to infidel

NYPD aims to ramp up recruitment of Muslims

Florida Muslims face prison for jihad mass murder bomb plot in NYC

Meet the bravest woman in America

The Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest that Pamela Geller and I organized and hosted in Garland, Texas on May 3, along with the jihad attack upon it, has become a defining issue. It has led to a national conversation about the nature of the freedom of speech, its importance, and what should or should not be its limits. It has exposed many people who appeared to be strong defenders of freedom to be cowards and appeasers. It has revealed that many key media players and people in powerful positions of authority have no idea of the nature and magnitude of the jihad threat, and no awareness of the war on free speech — much less any understanding of why the freedom of speech matters at all. It has demonstrated that many important opinion-makers neither appreciate nor value the freedom of speech, and don’t even really grasp what it is. It has likewise revealed others to be unexpectedly strong defenders of freedom. Some people I had thought were strong-minded and open-eyed have proved to be cowardly and blinkered. Other people I had suspected were trimmers and appeasers have shone brightly in their honesty and courage on this issue.

Those who have defended free speech in the wake of the jihad attack while heaping scorn upon Pamela Geller, and those who have fastidiously tried to protect themselves from the Left’s inevitable guilt-by-association smears by throwing in a line like, “Now mind you, I don’t agree with everything Pamela Geller says,” or “Now of course Pamela Geller’s approach is not something I agree with” or some such, quite simply disgust me. Pamela Geller has more clear-sighted awareness of the threat this nation faces, and more courage and resoluteness in facing it, thananyone in America today — especially those who are sitting in their armchairs today and sniffing at her for being “outrageous” and “provocative” while she has to live the rest of her life knowing that at any moment some jihadi maniac will try to get to his virgins by killing her. Yet people are acting these days as if she was the one with the AK-47 outside our event, or as if there would be no jihad threat against America were it not for her and for our Muhammad cartoon contest.

They won’t be able to keep up this denial much longer. It simply won’t be possible. The Islamic State has issued a detailed manual for jihad terror attacks and regular bloodshed in the streets of the United States and the nations of Western Europe. That is coming. To cower and say, “We won’t draw cartoons, we won’t do anything to offend you” not only will not stop this from coming, but it will embolden the jihadis, who always step up their game when they see weakness in their prey.

They see weakness in the U.S. That’s because the U.S. is weak. Not militarily, but societally. Culturally. Fewer and fewer people understand and value the principles upon which a free society is based. Fewer and fewer people are willing to stand to defend those principles. Cowards, trimmers, appeasers and open allies of the enemies of freedom abound.

Pamela Geller is standing for freedoms upon which the free world depends. That so few of power and influence are standing with her shows how severe the crisis really is.

These days are revealing many who were thought to be true to be false, and many who were thought to be false to be true. As a defender of freedom, Pamela Geller is the truest of the true. It is my immense honor to work with her, and to call her my friend.

“Meet the bravest woman in America,” by Joseph Farah, WND, May 15, 2015:

She’s been caricatured.

She’s been verbally tarred and feathered.

She’s been vilified, reviled, smeared, defamed and disparaged.

But something keeps Pam Geller going. Do you know what it is? It’s her love for her country and her passion for liberty.

For weeks now, I’ve been watching my friend Pam Geller taking media punches from the left and right for her private event in Garland, Texas, featuring Geert Wilders, another freedom fighter – an event attacked by armed jihadists who have determined to “slaughter” Pam Geller for her campaign to expose radical Islam’s vicious worldwide crusade against freedom, against women, against Jews, against Christians, against life and against everything but its own peculiar seventh-century view of the world.

Bill O’Reilly had the audacity to accuse Geller of “spurring” the attack with her event promoting freedom of speech.

Really?

So by criticizing a worldwide movement responsible for the ongoing genocide against Christians in the Middle East, the subjugation of women, a pattern of female genital mutilation, the ruthless beheading and crucifying and burning alive of its victims, she was spurring the attack? She was inviting it? She was goading them? Her motivation was to serve as a catalyst to an attack on her and her event?

Donald Trump said essentially the same thing, as did the New York Times and most of the handwringing media elite.

Others were satisfied to call Geller an Islamophobe.

That’s a good one. That’s rich.

This made-up word denotes someone who fears Islam. That’s hardly the case with Geller. It’s probably much more true of Geller’s most vocal critics, who, I suggest, think they buy cover from the violent Islamic radicals by bashing their enemies.

Join Pamela Geller in her fight to retain free-speech rights and the uniquely American culture — read “Stop The Islamization Of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance”

Have you ever wondered by so many leftists are soft on Shariah? Leftists say they support everything that Islam detests – “gay rights,” women’s rights, free expression, peace on earth. But they watch tacitly as Islam runs roughshod over their entire agenda. What gives?

Ultimately, it comes down to the left’s ideological commitment to “multiculturalism,” which began as a back-door assault against Western values and morphed into a war with Judeo-Christian ethics, America and Israel. Suddenly, they found common ground with the barbarians who behead anyone doesn’t lie prostrate before Allah five times a day.

Geller is no Islamophobe, a term which suggests cowardice. That’s a laugh. She’s probably the bravest women in America today.

It’s her critics who are the cowards.

Some of them, I am convinced, are even motivated to criticize her because they fear being associated with her strong stand against hatred, against murder, against torture, against rape and against their unholy war. Perhaps they believe they might be spared the kind of abuse and attacks she has experienced by creating a little space between Geller and themselves. Good luck with that! Radical Islam makes no distinctions between courageous enemies and cowardly ones. It doesn’t discriminate in its scorched-earth policies. They even murder Muslims who disagree with them about the chain of command after Muhammad died.

So throw out the Islamophobe term. It has lost its usefulness, if, indeed, it ever had any.

I’m with Pam Geller. I’m no Islamophobe. It’s just that when I see murder and torture and rape and genocide, I feel compelled to speak out about it, to resist it and to call evil what it is. I don’t know any other way. And neither does Pam Geller.

And that’s why I’m proud to call her my friend.

That’s why she’s the bravest woman in America.

And that’s why she needs and deserves the support of all freedom-loving Americans.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Spencer, PJM: Some Christians Object to Our Muhammad Cartoon Contest. Here’s Why They’re Wrong.

Australia: “Ordinary everyday teenager” converts to Islam, joins the Islamic State

EXCLUSIVE: Actual Video of the Garland, Texas Jihad Attack!

WARNING – THIS VIDEO CONTAINS EXTREMELY OBSCENE LANGUAGE.

When I first saw this amazing piece of video that was taped during the actual jihad attack in Garland Texas, I knew I was looking at an important piece of forensic evidence in an Islamic attack and a significant piece of law enforcement history. Therefore I wanted to be sure that a public release of this material in no way, shape or form would endanger any brave law enforcement officer or violate any laws of withholding evidence.

I gathered my team and we discussed the pros and cons of releasing this vital information and determined to make sure law enforcement had a copy and released it back to its owner with no restrictions on its use but then we took it a step further. We decided to blur out the police car and the police officers so that there would not be any chance of exposing any information, slight as it may be, which could be used in any way against the Garland Police Department or any of its officers.

From there, a phone conference was set up so that a few of us could actually speak with the men who taped the shooting. After about an hour phone conference with the two gentlemen I was even further impressed with the value of this video and more importantly, the story of the apparently only civilian eyewitnesses and their frightening experiences.

The moral of this story is that some very brave police officers killed two evil, hell-bent Muslim terrorists, thus potentially saving the innocent lives of those who were inside the convention center, including my team and me! But, the epilogue to this story is that two very brave men who stumbled on the scene of this Islamic State attack have stepped forward to show their video and tell their story so that all freedom loving people can get a better understanding of this epic battle between good and evil.

Pamela Geller “following in the steps of those Sons of Liberty in the Boston Tea Party of 1773″

Brilliant piece, and no doubt provocative to the cowards who control the public discourse today — not that they will do anything but heap more opprobrium upon Pamela Geller and others who are fighting to defend freedom. Those who say “Yours was a gratuitous event that was needlessly provocative” don’t realize that Islamic supremacists are endlessly offended, endlessly provoked, and endlessly demanding, and those who think that if we just don’t draw cartoons of Muhammad, all will be well, are ignorant (willfully or not) of what Muslims are forcing non-Muslims to stop doing in other countries around the world today, because these actions offend them. Those new demands are coming, lemmings. Get ready to bow down again.

“In Defense of Pamela Geller,” by Jeffrey Lord, American Spectator, May 7, 2015:

The backlash has been considerable.

Pam Geller, whose American Freedom Defense Initiative organized the Muhammad Art Exhibit and Cartoon Contest that sparked an armed assault by two self-appointed jihadis in Garland, Texas, has come under a withering assault for her actions. From Donald Trump to a crew at Fox that includes Bill O’Reilly, Laura Ingraham, Greta Van Susteren, Martha McCallum, Alan Colmes, ex-Bush aide and Fox contributor Brad Blakeman as well as liberal radio host Richard Fowler and doubtless more, Geller has been subjected to a firestorm of criticism.

I respectfully dissent.

According to Newsmax, Ms. Geller has now received an ISIS death threat. Or, as they say in the world of Islam, a “fatwa”:

“The attack by the Islamic State in America is only the beginning of our efforts to establish a wiliyah in the heart of our enemy,” the message reads. “Our aim was the khanzeer Pamela Geller and to show her that we don’t care what land she hides in or what sky shields her; we will send all our Lions to achieve her slaughter.”

Note well the word “khanzeer.” The translation is “swine” — as used in the Islamic world when Jews are called “the descendants of apes and pigs.”

Geller has been making the necessary media rounds to defend herself, including this post in Time magazine. Sean Hannity has come to her defense, saying: “You can’t draw a cartoon of the prophet Muhammad without expecting this violence? Is this how far we have sunk? That we’ve got to capitulate in this way?” Rush Limbaugh has leapt to her defense.

Megyn Kelly was blunt in her defense. “Even if you hate her message, she was promoting free speech,” Kelly said and told a guest critical of Geller that he was “fundamentally confused and wrong” and that “I’m concerned about the America you would have us live in.”

Me too.

The notion that any American anywhere should restrict their own freedom of speech because to do otherwise would provoke violence is a certain path to ending freedom of speech. Let’s go with one of the favorite criticisms of Geller — that what Ms. Geller did holding that conference in Garland, Texas, was the work of a “provocateur.” OK. And?

American history is littered with “provocateurs” whose words or actions “provoked” violence. From the Boston Tea Partiers in 1773 to the signing of the Declaration of Independence to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, time after time after time words and actions provoked violence. The Declaration of Independence, in fact, didn’t just provoke a little violence — it provoked a seven-year-long war with Great Britain that was said to have produced 25,000 American casualties. That’s before one gets to the estimated 4,000 British soldiers who were killed. Not to mention that the mere election of Abraham Lincoln provoked a string of events which in turn launched the Civil War. Killing some 600,000-plus Americans. Now there’s a provocation.

Just two months ago President Obama and former President Bush joined together in Selma, Alabama, to celebrate the work of “provocateurs” who knew — and were warned — not to march across Selma’s Edmund Pettus Bridge in support of black voting rights in 1965. As history records, Selma’s Sheriff Jim Clark faced the protesters at the head of a collection of billy-club wielding, horseback-riding troopers and used a bull horn to warn that the protesters “are ordered” to return to their homes or churches. Thus warned — quite specifically warned — that they were in danger of provoking violence, the marchers refused to turn back and kept coming. At Clark’s signal the troopers launched — and so ruthlessly inflicted violent beatings on the protesters that the event became known as “Bloody Sunday.”

In the aftermath of Bloody Sunday, a Geller-esque white Detroit housewife named Viola Liuzzo heard the call of Dr. Martin Luther King for Americans to come to Alabama and join the fight for voting rights. Liuzzo did so. And on the night of March 25, 1965, Liuzzo was driving a fellow marcher — a 19-year old black youth named Leroy Morton. Liuzzo’s car was spotted by the Ku Klux Klan. They were white racists who saw the fact of a white woman driving a black man as a provocation that violated the social mores of segregation and white supremacy. In response to this “provocation,” Liuzzo’s car was overtaken by a car filled with Klan members. They fired at Viola Liuzzo, shooting her twice in the head and killing her instantly. The car crashed, Morton played dead and once the Klan had departed went for help. This same white woman-black man combination was exactly the same social provocation cited in the killing of Emmett Till, the young black teenager who was murdered in Mississippi for allegedly whistling at a white woman.

Today Viola Liuzzo and the marchers across the Edmund Pettus Bridge are seen as heroes. In fact, during his visit to Selma for that fiftieth anniversary tribute the President specifically said: “If Selma taught us anything, it’s that our work is never done.” Really? Is the President saying he wants more racial provocations around America? Was he himself acting as a Geller-style “provocateur”?

Should Viola Liuzzo have not gone to Alabama? Should she not have protested for voting rights or had a black man in her car — because what she was doing was “provocative” to the white supremacist view of society and would provoke violence? To listen to today’s chorus of critics of Pamela Geller, apparently the answer is no, Viola Liuzzo should never have gone, and yes, in the end she provoked her own death.

The entirety of the civil rights movement and quite specifically the words and actions of its leaders — most prominently including Dr. King himself — were seen in the day as provocative of violence. In fact, King himself would pay for all those words and actions with his life, shot to death while in Memphis for a 1968 march. Should Dr. King never have marched, spoken, and protested? Should the Civil Rights Act of 1964 never been enacted because it was the result of provocative, violence-inciting Freedom Riders and marches across the South?

There’s another fact here that is ignored. Forget the threat of Islamic radicalism. Take the issue off the table entirely. The uncomfortable fact of life today in a 21st century America drenched in television, films, and social media is that people of prominence, whether they are candidates for office or simply media figures or celebrities, are all too frequently targeted by those who are provoked by their words and actions.

Bill O’Reilly — and I’m not picking on him here but since he has raised the subject himself — is a case in point. Mr. O’Reilly, famously, is the host of Fox’s The O’Reilly Factor, a show with a huge popular following. Five nights a week for 19 years O’Reilly has been delivering a show that is filled with controversial views and frequently controversial people. To his credit, he never holds back in saying what he thinks.

Is what Bill O’Reilly does every night “provocative”? Does Bill O’Reilly invite violence? Well, catch this 2008 CBS interview with O’Reilly himself, as reported by CBS:

“My life is dangerous now,” he said. “You know, I have bodyguards and security. I can’t go many places. I can’t be in certain crowd situations. When I do a book signing, I gotta have a phalanx of state troopers there because there are crazy people. And then there’re the Web sites and all of that, which are just totally out of control.

“They encourage these nuts. You know, I was thinking about John Lennon, you know, and John Lennon was tryin’ to be a nice guy, signing the guy’s thing and [Chapman] pops him. So, that is the worst part of the whole ‘Factor’ experience.”

Got that? What Bill O’Reilly does on his television show is so provocative to some people that his life “is dangerous now” and he has to have “bodyguards and security.” What O’Reilly is saying here is that yes, he too is a “provocateur” — just like Pam Geller. Should O’Reilly quit his show? Should he be seen not as a television host with an interesting show but rather condemned as a deliberately provocative public danger whose very presence anywhere in public could result in violence to innocent bystanders? Should he curtail his First Amendment right to say what he wants on his own television show? Should he be condemned for nightly doing something that is, to use O’Reilly’s description of Geller’s actions, “dumb”?

Absolutely not. That would be dumb.

The disturbing reality here is that, as mentioned, this “provocateur’ phenomenon isn’t limited to Bill O’Reilly or Pam Geller. All kinds of people in the public eye who are not the President of the United States with a retinue of Secret Service agents are targeted by someone Out There as a “provocateur.” As O’Reilly himself mentioned, former Beatle John Lennon’s celebrity alone was enough to provoke a killer. Just the other week, the news brought a recording of a 911 call from a frantic actress, Sandra Bullock. Bullock was locked in a closet in her own home — while a crazed stalker prowled though her home looking for her. Why? For no other reason than Bullock’s movie celebrity had provoked this nut into violently breaking into her home. Should Bullock halt her acting career because it has provoked violence?

What Pamela Geller is about — courageously and boldly — is standing up for freedom. That’s it. That’s all. “My country is in danger,” she said to Sean Hannity on his radio show yesterday — and she is right. When O’Reilly says “Insulting the entire Muslim world is stupid… It does not advance the cause of liberty or get us any closer to defeating the savage jihad,” he is, as Megyn Kelly said, confused. It isn’t Geller’s job to defeat ISIS. That’s the President’s job. It isn’t her job to provoke — or not provoke. It isn’t her job to be smart — or stupid. It is her God-given, constitutional right to stand up for freedom of speech — and she exercises that right. It is her job, as it is that of every American, to work to see that our country is not endangered by gradually giving up our freedoms one by one in a constant backsliding down the slippery slope of tyranny.

What concerns with all this criticism? In effect what the critics are saying is that we should start curtailing American freedoms — the Constitution — to avoid “provoking” or offending someone. Muslims today, gays yesterday, rioting Baltimoreans last week. And so on through some catechism of political correctness.

Where does this stop? Just as Islam forbids images of The Prophet, so too does it forbid homosexuality. If Americans are not supposed to “provoke” Muslims by doing something that offends their religion, does this mean the push that is on now for gay marriage should come to a screeching halt? Should the Supreme Court make gay marriage illegal because to recognize gay marriage would deliberately provoke Muslims across America and around the world? Indeed, isn’t an American approval of any gay “right” a deliberate provocation of Muslim sensibilities?

This is, I would suggest, an untenable place for conservatives to be. It’s an untenable place for liberals to be. It’s an untenable place for Americans to be. It isn’t enough to say some version of “oh sure Pam Geller has the right to do it but she’s provocative and what she did is dumb.” As Sean Hannity has said, Americans cannot slip into the habit of saying “I’m for free speech…but…”

What Pam Geller is doing is bravely standing where so many Americans celebrated today once stood. She is following in the steps of those Sons of Liberty in the Boston Tea Party of 1773 or the signers of the Declaration in 1776 Philadelphia or the civil rights marchers on that Edmund Pettus Bridge or Viola Liuzzo in 1965….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Geller, Wilders, Spencer “fighting the West’s battle for freedom”

VDH: Jihadists have “already cut a huge swath out of American free speech”

You’re on the Front Line of the Islamic War

Does anyone remember what happened on September 11, 2001? Or is it just “ancient history” at this point? Some three thousand totally innocent Americans were murdered by a sneak attack on the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. Who did it? The same murderous Islamists who attacked an event in Garland, Texas to focus attention on the insanity that passes for one of the world’s great “religions.”

Islam is not a religion. It is a cult around the so-called prophet Mohammad and his assertion that the Koran was the word of Allah. The name Islam means “submission” and the purpose of Islam is the tyrannical control over the entire world’s population. Within this alleged holy faith, two sects, Shiites and Sunnis, have been at war almost from its inception, never failing to kill one another.

The turmoil in the Middle East is the direct result of this murderous cult and those Muslims who oppose the killing that flows from Islam must keep their silence or become its victims. Jews and Christians can speak out and debate about aspects of their faiths, but Muslim risk death when they do so. For those Jews and Christians living in Middle Eastern nations, death is always a prospect for no other reason than not being Muslim.

Americans have not yet fully embraced the fact that they are on the front lines along with other Western nations in a global war with Islam.

Will it take another 9/11? Surely the recent attack by two Islamists on May 3rd in Garland, Texas, was another wake up call. They arrived intent on killing as many of those attending the American Freedom Defense Initiative event. A Garland police officer killed both before anyone had to die in the name of the Bill of Rights.

AA - Garland TX and IslamBut why Garland, Texas? Because, as my friend Amil Imani noted in a recent commentary, “The venue was chosen as a defiant response to a Muslim group that had held a conference entitled ‘Stand With the Prophet Against Terror and Hate.”’ Ironic, eh? Their response to the event that invited cartoons of Muhammed as to want to kill the participants. If that is not war, I do not know what is.

If Muslims feel hatred, they have earned it here in the United States and elsewhere they have attacked any criticism or defiance, from Charlie Hebdo in France to the countless attacks around the world from Mumbai, India to Bali. A website, the Religion of Peace, com, posts news of the daily assaults by Muslim on both other Muslims and those they call “infidels”, unbelievers.

Pamela Geller who leads the American Freedom Defense Initiative has been widely assailed for her event that was intended to respond to the earlier one in Garland that Amil Amani noted “was convened to eliminate free speech or any expression, verbal and/or artwork depicting the Islamic prophet Mohammad in a negative light.”

“As a life-long expert on the subject of Islam, I felt that this event—more than anything else Pamela could have done—would be the target of a violence terrorist attack in the name of the religion of peace, either real and explosive or on social media at the very least.” It was real.

The Garland police were taking it seriously. Amani said “I was astonished at the large police presence already there. Some of the cops were dressed in tactical gear and carrying AR-15s. The security was ubiquitous, almost as if something untoward had already happened.”

Speaking in an interview with Sean Hannity on May 6, Geller noted that neither the FBI nor the Department of Homeland Security has yet to have contacted her about the thwarted attack. “This is a serious threat” said Hannity. “Basically a Fatwah, a death threat, has now been issued.” Geller noted the lack of interest or concern expressed by those in our government one might expect to at the least make an inquiry, adding that “I have a team now, private security, and NYPD counterterror has been in touch with me.”

Now I call that a level of courage for which Pamela Geller should be praised, but I heard too many criticisms that she was being “provocative.”

“Provocative”?????

When are Americans going to realize that the Islamists do not need any provocation? When are we going to start acting like we are at war? A good first step would be to stop inviting Muslims to immigrate to America. The Obama administration has been importing as many as possible. The next step is to understand that it is Obama and his administration that are part of the Islamic war.

It is the Pamela Geller’s that are crying out to us. We need to listen. We need to support them. We need to arm ourselves if we have not done so already. Then we need to secure “concealed carry” laws in every State of the Union. We are at war.

© Alan Caruba, 2015

Pamela Geller — America’s Churchill

When Adolf Hitler published “Mein Kampf” in 1926, he spelled out his vision for Germany’s domination of the world and annihilation of the Jews. Germany would not have lost WWI, he wrote, “if twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the people had been held under poison gas.”

In 1933, Hitler’s Nazis took power. The few people who had read Hitler’s manifesto and took him seriously fled in time to save their lives. But most – including most Jews – didn’t. Comfortable, often prominent, and fully accepted, they believed in German society and could not fathom that a madman actually meant what he said and intended to fully carry out his malevolent vision.

Even as things grew increasingly menacing – through Kristallnacht, book burnings, the stultifying restriction of civil liberties, the expulsion of Jewish children from schools, the construction of Dachau, Auschwitz, Treblinka, and other death camps – there were Jews and others who downplayed Hitler’s ominous threat. Worse, they derided and vilified those who took him seriously, calling them fear-mongers and haters and liars. Sound familiar?

Today, the entire world faces the threat of galloping Islamic terrorism. We see this every day in every newscast – grisly individual and mass beheadings, people chained in cages and set on fire, hundreds of schoolgirls kidnapped, raped, and worse; Christian churches burned to the ground with their desperate congregants locked inside; innocent cartoonists shot dead and their colleagues gravely injured in France, Jewish babies murdered in their cribs and strollers. Increasingly, we see “honor killings” in the United States, as well as other freedom-smothering manifestations of Sharia law.

What happened in Germany in the 1930s and ’40s is happening in America today, except the assault on our system is not coming from Nazism, but rather from radical Islam. The mullahs in Iran and their surrogates around the world stand at podiums and declare boldly: Death to America, Death to Israel! They tell us outright that their goal is to create a caliphate in which Sharia law is the law of the land, in which all infidels – anyone who does not practice or has not converted to Islam – are relegated to second-class citizenship, draconian taxes, and groveling servitude, if not outright enslavement. Some of our own elected officials echo their words. All of them, like Hitler, rely on apologists who flagrantly lie about this escalating threat. Shame on them!

During WWII, Winston Churchill was the proverbial canary in the coal mine, repeatedly issuing the earliest warnings to the Western world of Hitler’s psychotic megalomania and evil intentions. Again, few listened, while prominent, educated, and sanctimonious types derided and vilified Churchill and called him a fear-monger and a hater and a liar. Sound familiar?

Since 2004, when she founded the Atlas Shrugs website (now PamelaGeller.com), Pamela Geller has been our Winston Churchill, warning of the increasingly aggressive actions of radical Islamists, the terrifying acts they commit, and their fervent goal to eviscerate our Constitution and Bill of Rights – you know, those little documents that afford us spoiled Americans the right to say what we want, be it in speech, drawings, art, movies, and music, without fear of being murdered!

That is why, as journalist Jonah Goldberg points out, the First Amendment applies to things that people find offensive, for instance Andreas Serrano’s “Piss Christ,” in which the “artist” urinated in a glass and then placed a plastic icon of Jesus on the cross into it, or the Brooklyn Museum of Art’s exhibition of a portrait of the Virgin Mary, which was partly comprised of pornographic pictures and elephant dung.

As I recall, all the holier-than-thou hypocrites who are calling for Geller’s head were bleating their support of “free speech” back then.

That is also why people who cherish the First Amendment agreed that it was okay to have a loathsome Nazi contingent walk the streets of Skokie, Illinois (with its formidable Jewish population) in the mid 1970s, and why other protest movements have been so powerful and important: for instance Patrick Henry’s bold declaration, “Give me liberty or give me death”; the Yo No rebellion in Cuba against its repressive government; the Boston Tea Party’s “no taxation without representation” protest; Susan B. Anthony’s “illegal” vote for women’s suffrage; Henry Thoreau’s demonstrations against slavery; the history-changing actions of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks against racial discrimination…the list of heroic people sounding the alarms is endless.

Throughout history, all of these crusaders for freedom have been insulted by the cowardly accommodators among us, the appeasers, the apologists, and the deluded masses who thought, as Churchill said, that “the crocodile [of tyranny, fascism, murder, even genocide] would eat them last.”

Pamela Geller succeeded in literally flushing out the enemy within, two of the many jihadists in our midst. Only days after their failed assassination attempt, ISIS claimed credit for the attack and embarrassed our Department of Homeland Security into increasing security conditions at U.S. military bases and elevating the threat level in the U.S. to BRAVO – not the highest level, but pretty damn high!

But instead of praising Geller for her foresight and courage, cowards and apologists on both the left and right used the tactics of radical Saul Alinsky (described in his own manifesto, “Rules for Radicals”), which are to: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Hurling gratuitous epithets and insults and lying are also in their repertoire.

But in spite of it all, Geller is not intimidated, because like Churchill she has truth on her side! She awarded First Place to a graphic artist who left Islam for the freedom that the First Amendment offers.

Still, it is clear that few people have learned the lessons of September 11th and the 14 years that have followed about the increasingly urgent need for vigilance against a deadly serious enemy, and for the equally compelling need to thank and to celebrate people like Pamela Geller for risking everything to protect our priceless freedoms.

As journalist and author Mark Steyn reminds us, “you’ve heard them a zillion times this last week: ‘Of course, I’m personally, passionately, absolutely committed to free speech. But…and the minute you hear the ‘but,’ none of the build-up to it matters.”

“…all the nice respectable people are now telling us,” Steyn adds, what Mohammed Atta told the passengers on 9/11: “Stay quiet and you’ll be okay.”

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Renew America.

Now For the Bad News

An article by Christopher Carson in the April 27 edition of Daily Mailer.FrontPage, titled, A Mad Max Nation with No Electrical Grid, is enough to scare the bejabbers out of anyone.

In predicting what America would be like during a major outage of our electrical grid, Carson tells us: “It’s been one year since a white-hot study by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission was leaked to the Wall Street Journal. The government study concluded that coordinated attacks on only nine electrical transmission substations in the United States could bring down the entire trinity of grids (called interconnections) that supply electricity to America. Terrorists would have to physically destroy only four in the East, three in the West, and two in Texas, plus one large transformer production plant, and the entire United States grid would be down for at least 18 months, probably longer.

Imagine what that would mean for a nation entirely dependent upon electricity for its very survival. Almost all large transformers are constructed overseas, including China, and the typical lag time from order to delivery and installation is two years. Forget no iPhones. Try no working sewer systems, no heating, no cars (because no gasoline pumps), no transportation, no garbage collection, no hospitals, no medicine kept in cold storage, no working government, and no civilization. It wouldn’t even be a medieval society because Europe in the Middle Ages had functioning governments, currencies, and a trading system. The USA would be more like the world of Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdomefor the lucky survivors.”

This was preceded by an April 23 article by Discovery Communications and the Washington Post, describing a University of Utah geophysical study published in the current edition of the journal Science. The University of Utah study, titled, Yellowstone Supervolcano Much Bigger Than Thought, reports that a giant reservoir of magma and hot rock beneath the Yellowstone supervolcano has been found and imaged. The newly found reservoir lies 12-28 miles below the surface, and is four-and-a-half times larger than the shallower, hot melted rock zone that powers current Yellowstone geysers and caused the caldera’s last eruption some 70,000 years ago.

The volume of the newly imaged, deeper reservoir is a whopping 11,000 cubic-miles (46,000 cubic kilometers), which is about the volume of Long Island with 9 miles of hot rock piled on it, or 300 Lake Tahoes…”

According to the Washington Post, the Yellowstone supervolcano is “one of the world’s largest volcanoes, one that is quiescent for the moment but is capable of erupting with catastrophic violence at a scale never before witnessed by human beings. In a big eruption, Yellowstone would eject 1,000 times as much material as the 1980 Mount St. Helens eruption. This would be a disaster felt on a global scale, which is why scientists are looking at this thing closely

“The newly discovered reservoir is 4.5 times larger than the chamber above it. There’s enough magna there to fill the Grand Canyon. The reservoir is on top of a long plume of manga that emerges from deep within the Earth’s mantle… This system has been in place for roughly 17 million yearsThe last time Yellowstone had a calderic eruption was 640,000 years ago, and the misshapen hole it created

was about 25 miles by 37 miles across. This caldera has since been filled in by lava flows and natural erosion, and Yellowstone Lake covers a portion of the area. The main visual evidence of the old caldera is the striking absence of mountains at the heart of the park: They were literally blown away in the last eruption.

But the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission study on the likely impact of a terrorist attack on our national electric grid, and the University of Utah study on the Yellowstone supervolcano, are only speculative… forecasts of what might happen “if and when.” That’s the good news; now for some bad news.

In an October 23, 2013 study by respected writer and researcher Michael Snyder, titled, 28 Signs That The West Coast Is Being Absolutely Fried With Nuclear Radiation From Fukushima, Snyder paints a grim picture of the impact of the March 11, 2011 nuclear meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima I Nuclear Power Plant. The failure occurred when the plant was inundated by a tsunami following the magnitude 9.0 Tohoku earthquake, resulting in the meltdown of three of the plants six nuclear reactors.

As Snyder prefaces his study he points to a map provided by the Nuclear Emergency Tracking Center which shows that “…radiation levels at radiation monitoring stations across the country are elevated… this is particularly true along the west coast of the United States. Every single day, 300 tons of radioactive water from Fukushima enters the Pacific Ocean. That means that the total amount of radioactive material released from Fukushima is constantly increasing, and it is steadily building up in our food chain.”

As evidence of his assertion, Snyder notes a U.S. Geological Survey statement stating that some of the thirty-three polar bears found along the Alaska coastline showed evidence of “alopecia (loss of hair) and other skin diseases.”

Snyder quotes National Marine Fisheries Service wildlife biologist, Sharon Melin, as saying that, at island rookeries off the Southern California coast, 45 percent of sea lion pups born in June 2013 were dead by October of that year. The normal mortality rate among sea lion pups is less than one-third.

Among the findings in his research, Snyder notes that:

Along the Pacific coast of Canada and the Alaska coastline, the population of sockeye salmon is at a historic low.

Scientists have found that something is causing the fish along the west coast of Canada to bleed from their gills, bellies, and eyeballs. One test in California found that all 15 of the blue fin tuna examined in a test were contaminated with radiation from Fukushima. .

A vast field of radioactive debris from Fukushima that is approximately the size of California has crossed the Pacific Ocean and is starting to collide with the west coast. It is estimated that the radioactivity of coastal waters off the west coast could double over the next five to six years.

The California coastline is being transformed into a “dead zone.” Coastal rocks are unnaturally free of kelp, barnacles, and sea urchins and tidal pools are eerily devoid of crabs, snails, and other scurrying creatures. Snyder reports that there are days in which he is hard-pressed to find even a half dozen seagulls and/or terns on the beach, compared to 10-15 years ago when the skies and all the beaches were filled with seagulls.

Up to 100 times as much nuclear radiation from Fukushima has been released into the Pacific Ocean than was released during the entire 1986 Chernobyl disaster in Ukraine. It is projected that the entire ocean will soon have radioactive Cesium levels 5 to 10 times higher than during

the era of heavy atomic testing in the Pacific during the 1940s and ‘50s.

In 2012, the Vancouver Sun reported that Cesium-137 was being found in 73% of mackerel, 91% of halibut, 92% of sardines, 93% of tuna and eel, 94% of cod and anchovies, and 100% of the carp, seaweed, shark, and monkfish sold by Japan to Canadian markets. Some experts expect high levels of cancer among west coast residents from eating contaminated fish.

The BBC has reported that radiation levels around Fukushima are 18 times greater than previously believed. Atmospheric radiation from Fukushima reached the west coast of the U.S. in just a few days in 2011.

The Iodine-131, Cesium-137, and Strontium-90 that are constantly emanating from Fukushima will affect the health of those living in the northern hemisphere for generations to come. Iodine-131 can be ingested into the thyroid where it emits beta particles that damage tissue Cesium-137 from Fukushima has been found in fish caught as far away as California. It spreads throughout the body, but tends to accumulate in muscle tissue. Strontium-90, which mimics Calcium and accumulates in the bones, has a half-life of around 29 years.

According to the Wall Street Journal, it is projected that the Fukushima cleanup may take up to 40 years. Yale professor Charles Perrow warns that, if the Fukushima cleanup is not handled with 100% precision, humanity could be threatened for thousands of years.

To consider the impact of these tragedies… one politically preventable and two dictated by the laws of nature… tends to make issues such as global warming, the Middle East conflict, and an $18 trillion national debt pale by comparison. Since it is impossible to say anything remotely positive about the fates that might await us, a few wise words on fatalism appear to be in order.

Samuel Butler once said, “Let us eat and drink, neither forgetting death unduly nor remembering it. The Lord hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, etc., and the less we think about it the better.”

Finally, George Bernard Shaw once said, “Old men are dangerous: it doesn’t matter to them what is going to happen to the world.” At age 81, I find that to be a very comforting thought.

Feds overlooked Texas jihadi because “there are so many like him”

“There are so many like him that you have to prioritize your investigations.” But…but…it’s a tiny minority of extremists!

“Texas Attacker Left Trail of Extremist Ideas on Twitter,” by Scott Shane, New York Times, May 5, 2015:

WASHINGTON — Counterterrorism officials on Tuesday were studying the electronic trails left by two men killed by a police officer as they shot at a Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest in Texas, looking for any direct ties to the Islamic State extremist group in Syria. The group praised the gunmen in a statement as “soldiers of the caliphate,” the unified Muslim land that it purports to be building.

But any secret ties that officials might find may be less important than the public exchanges of messages on Twitter by one of the gunmen, Elton Simpson, in the weeks before the attack. Mr. Simpson, a convert to Islam with a long history of extremism, regularly traded calls for violence on Twitter with Islamic State fighters and supporters, as well as avowed enemies of Pamela Geller, the organizer of the cartoon contest.

His Twitter contacts included Junaid Hussain, a British fighter with the Islamic State in Syria known as Abu Hussain al-Britani, and Mohamed Abdullahi Hassan, a Somali-American now in Somalia who uses the name Mujahid Miski and frequently promotes the Islamic State. Both men called for violence, and Mr. Hassan had suggested the Texas event as a possible target.

On April 23, 10 days before the Texas attack, Mr. Hassan linked to the planned cartoon event in Texas, praised the January shootings at a satirical newspaper in Paris and called on jihadists in the United States to follow that example.

“The brothers from the Charlie Hebdo attack did their part,” Mr. Hassan wrote in the post. “It’s time for brothers in the #US to do their part.”

Later the same day, Mr. Simpson posted about the cartoon contest, using the handle Shariah is Light: “When will they ever learn. They are planning on selecting the best picture drawn of Rasulullah (saws) in Texas.” Rasulullah (saws) is a respectful phrase for the prophet.

The onslaught of recruitment propaganda has multiplied the number of online enthusiasts for the Islamic State in the United States, giving counterterrorism investigators the difficult task of deciding which are simply fantasizing in public and which might be planning violence.

“The ISIS guys are talking to these wannabes on Twitter all day long,” a senior law enforcement official said. “It’s like the devil is sitting on their shoulder saying, ‘Come on, they’re insulting the prophet, what are you going to do about it?’ ”

The official, who would speak about the continuing investigation only on condition of anonymity, said that although Mr. Simpson had long been under F.B.I. scrutiny, he had not appeared to be preparing for violence. “There are so many like him that you have to prioritize your investigations,” the official said….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Video: Robert Spencer on Newsmax TV on the Texas jihad attack

Pamela Geller in Time Magazine: A Response to My Critics—This Is a War

FBI under increased scrutiny for failing to prevent Garland jihad shooting

They had Elton Simpson on their radar for years. But it is FBI policy in the Obama Administration not to acknowledge, much less study, the beliefs that motivate such attacks. The FBI training materials, by order of John Brennan and Barack Obama, do not mention Islam and jihad in connection with terrorism.

So how can the FBI distinguish between those who are genuine threats and those who are not?

They can’t, because such questions will turn on matters involving their Islamic piety — which is off limits for investigation.

“Mohammed Contest Attack an ISIS First in the US,” by Charlene Aaron, CBN News, May 5, 2015:

ISIS says it was behind the attack outside a contest in Texas featuring cartoons of Islam’s prophet Mohammed. It is the first time the group claimed to have carried out an attack inside the United States.

Meanwhile, the FBI is under increased scrutiny for failing to prevent Sunday’s attack after it had closely monitored one of the suspects in the shooting.

Federal agents had been monitoring 30-year-old Elton Simpson for possible terrorist ties for more than a decade.

Simpson and his roommate were shot dead after opening fire on a security guard outside the event.

In the past, FBI agents recorded Simpson talking about fighting “non-believers” for Allah and about plans to travel to Africa to link up with Islamist brothers in Somalia.

Five years ago, he was arrested for attempting to join an al Qaeda-affiliated group there.

Years spent investigating Simpson for terrorism ties resulted in three years of probation, placement on the no-fly list, and $600 in fines and court fees.

His attorney says he became increasingly agitated.

“I mean, I know that some of the statements that he made were, ‘If you die on the battlefield’ than you get, you know, whatever, the wives and things like that, but I think you hear that out of a lot of people. I mean, that’s a belief of the Muslim faith,” Kristina Sitton, Simpson’s attorney, said in 2011.

Simpson recently posted messages on Twitter about his dismay with his country.

Just minutes before Sunday’s shooting, he tweeted that he and a brother had pledged loyalty to ISIS.

“May Allah accept us as mujahideen [jihadists],” he wrote.

Though the FBI was aware of his social media rants, he was not under 24-hour surveillance.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Egypt: Five Christian children held for blasphemy – for insulting the Islamic State

Here we go: McClatchy suggests limits on free speech after Texas jihad shooting