Posts

Obama administration lied, exposed as architect of anti-Israel UN action

“It also has come to light that Kerry held a meeting in December with senior Palestinian diplomat Saeb Erekat. Documents believed to have been leaked by Egypt confirm that Kerry and Erekat discussed forwarding the resolution, a charge that senior White House officials continue to deny.”

The Obama administration will leave behind a long, long record of dishonesty and betrayal.

“White House On Defense After Being Exposed as Architect of Anti-Israel U.N. Action,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, December 29, 2016:

Senior Obama administration officials are scrambling to provide explanations after multiple reports, including in the Washington Free Beacon, identified the White House as being a chief architect of a recent United Nations resolution condemning the state of Israel, according to conversations with multiple former and current U.S. officials.

On the heels of the hotly contested resolution, which condemned Israel for building homes in its capital, Jerusalem, senior Obama administration officials, including Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden, have been identified as leading the charge to ensure the anti-Israel measure won approval by the U.N. Security Council.

The administration’s denials of this charge broke down during the past several days as multiple reporters confirmed the Obama administration worked behind-the-scenes to help shape and forward the resolution.

The Free Beacon disclosed on Monday that Vice President Joe Biden phoned Ukraine’s president to ensure that country voted in favor of the resolution. While the White House issued multiple denials, further reports from Israel and Europe have confirmed a phone call between the leaders did in fact take place.

It also has come to light that Kerry held a meeting in December with senior Palestinian diplomat Saeb Erekat. Documents believed to have been leaked by Egypt confirm that Kerry and Erekat discussed forwarding the resolution, a charge that senior White House officials continue to deny.

White House National Security Council official Ned Price described such a meeting as a “total fabrication,” despite public documents highlighting the powwow between Kerry and Erekat.

One senior Obama administration official who spoke to the Free Beacon said the White House did not help draft the resolution, as Israeli leaders have suggested in recent days.

“We’ve been entirely clear that this was an Egyptian resolution,” said the official, explaining that the effort did not originate with the White House. Reports of a meeting between Kerry, Erekat, and White House National Security Adviser Susan Rice are not correct, the official said.

However, these claims have been disputed by multiple sources who spoke to the Free Beacon both on and off the record about the situation.

Jonathan Schanzer, a Middle East expert and vice president for research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told the Free Beacon that he spoke with U.S. officials in September who admitted that “a U.N. measure of some shape or form was actively considered,” a charge that runs counter the White House’s official narrative.

“We know that this administration was at a minimum helping to shape a final resolution at the United Nations and had been working on this for months,” Schanzer said.

“This isn’t terribly dissimilar from the administration’s attempts to spin the cash pallets they sent to Iran,” he added, referring to the administration’s efforts to conceal the fact that it sent the Iranian government some $1.7 billion in cash.

“The fact is, the administration has been flagged as being an active participant in this U.N. resolution,” Schanzer said. “Now they wish to try to spin this as inconsequential. This was an attempt by the administration to lead from behind, as they have done countless times in the past and which has failed countless times in the past.”

As with the meeting between Kerry and Erekat, the phone call between Biden and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has been confirmed multiple times by a plethora of sources in the United States, Israel, and Europe following the Free Beacon’s initial report.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in a weekly cabinet meeting that “the Obama administration initiated [the resolution], stood behind it, coordinated on the wording and demanded that it be passed.”

The administration has not yet addressed the discrepancy between its own narrative and that being revealed in the press….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Guinea President: “Terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. Indeed, Islam is a religion of peace.”

Spain: Snipers and armed police to guard public areas amid jihad terror fears

Obama’s ‘final solution’ for the state of Israel

On December 28th, 2016 John Kerry gave his final speech as the outgoing U.S. Secretary of State.  Kerry’s “Remarks on Middle East Peace” lasted 1 hour and 13 minutes. In his speech Kerry outlined President Obama’s “final solution” for the state of Israel.

One phrase struck me. Kerry stated, “Israel can be Jewish or democratic – not both.”

But Israel is already Jewish and democratic. There have been Israeli Arab members of the Knesset ever since the first Knesset elections in 1949. There are currently 17 Arab members of the Knesset, and 59 former Arab members. Kerry asked:

How would Israel respond to a growing civil rights movement from Palestinians, demanding a right to vote, or widespread protests and unrest across the West Bank? How does Israel reconcile a permanent occupation with its democratic ideals? How does the U.S. continue to defend that and still live up to our own democratic ideals?

Israel already recognizes the right of every Israeli citizen, Jew or Arab or Christian or Druz, el al, to vote. Israel has been dealing with terrorism against the Jewish state since 1949 and throughout its history, from ancient Rome to the PLO and HAMAS.

The U.S. continues to defend Israel because it is the basis, the foundation, of our own democratic ideals. Founding Father John Adams in a letter to F. A. Van der Kemp dated February 16, 1808 wrote:

“I will insist the Hebrews have [contributed] more to civilize men than any other nation. If I was an atheist and believed in blind eternal fate, I should still believe that fate had ordained the Jews to be the most essential instrument for civilizing the nations …

They are the most glorious nation that ever inhabited this Earth. The Romans and their empire were but a bubble in comparison to the Jews. They have given religion to three-quarters of the globe and have influenced the affairs of mankind more and more happily than any other nation, ancient or modern.”

There are no Jewish members of the PLO nor in HAMAS, which controls the Gaza strip. Additionally, those nations surrounding Israel are Muslim and undemocratic, abiding by shariah laws that reject non-Muslims. Why? Because the Koran says so.

So what is Kerry projecting on behalf of President Obama? What has been, and clearly is, Obama’s “final solution” to end the conflict in the Middle East?

Answer: A Jew free Palestinian state.

Kerry focused on Jewish “settlements” in Judea and Samara, historic land that has belong to and had been occupied by, the Jewish people for thousands of years. Kerry sees these settlements as the existential threat to a two state solution stating:

So the settler agenda is defining the future of Israel. And their stated purpose is clear. They believe in one state: greater Israel. In fact, one prominent minister, who heads a pro-settler party, declared just after the U.S. election – and I quote – “the era of the two-state solution is over,” end quote. And many other coalition ministers publicly reject a Palestinian state. And they are increasingly getting their way, with plans for hundreds of new units in East Jerusalem recently announced and talk of a major new settlement building effort in the West Bank to follow.

Then Kerry asks, “So why are we so concerned? Why does this matter? Well, ask yourself these questions: What happens if that agenda succeeds? Where does that lead?”

May I suggest that a one state solution leads to what now exists in the Jewish state of Israel. A pluralistic society where all segments of the population, regardless of religious affiliation or ethnicity, live in peace side by side as individuals.

Kerry laments:

So if there is only one state, you would have millions of Palestinians permanently living in segregated enclaves in the middle of the West Bank, with no real political rights, separate legal, education, and transportation systems, vast income disparities, under a permanent military occupation that deprives them of the most basic freedoms. Separate and unequal is what you would have. And nobody can explain how that works. Would an Israeli accept living that way? Would an American accept living that way? Will the world accept it?

Under a united Jewish state of Israel Palestinians do have access to real political rights, education, transportation systems, serve in the IDF and have enhanced economic opportunities in what is know as “the startup nation.”

If you want to know what an independent Palestinian state would look like and act just look at the Gaza strip. A radicalized Islamic state that is Jew free where its citizens have no political rights and suffer under a regime more interested in arming itself for the sole purpose of killing non-Muslims and an exporter of terrorism globally.

The only option going forward for President-elect Trump is a one state solution.

As David Friedman, President-elect Trump’s nominee to become the ambassador to Israel said in a pre-election interview with The Algemeiner in early November:

“It is inconceivable there could be a mass evacuation on that magnitude, in the unlikely event that there was an otherwise comprehensive peace agreement,” Friedman said. “It makes no sense for Judea and Samaria to be ‘Judenrein [void of Jews],’ any more than it makes sense for Israel to be ‘Arabrein [void of Arabs].’ It’s not fair.”

The two-state solution is dead. Long live the one-state solution.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

How Barack Obama fooled the Jews and betrayed them once he had their money

Security Council Resolution 2334: The Legal Significance

John Kerry is Dead Wrong about Israeli Settlements by Gregg Roman The Los Angeles Times

Obama and Kerry Seek to Make Israel Indefensible

Kerry Takes a Parting Shot at Israel in Middle East Speech

RELATED VIDEO: Tom Trento, Director of The United West hosts Dr. Andy Bostom and Ken Abramowitz in studio to deconstruct the devastating decision by the Obama Administration to abstain from voting on the UN National Security Council, regarding the issue of “settlements” in Israel.

The Malice of the Leader of the Democratic Party

President Barack Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party. It is expected that after he leaves office on January 20th, 2017 he will continue to be the de-facto leader of the Democratic Party.

His legacy is the legacy of the Democratic Party.

In my column “How Democrats Fundamentally Changed from the Party of JFK to the Party of BHO” I asked, “Where are the Blue Dog Democrats? Purged from the BHO Party? As Ronald Reagan once said he did not leave the Democratic Party, rather the Democratic Party left him. So it is with many Democrats. The BHO Party has left them in the lurch.”

The Democratic Party has become the party of protests, anarchists and tribalism. They cling to illusions of racism, bigotry and embrace an anti-American world view. 

We have been writing about how President Obama has warmly embraced Islam as a person, as President and as the leader of the Democratic Party. Since his election in 2008 there has been malice, with forethought, against America in general and Israel in particular.

In a May 2015 column Dissected: President Obama’s Anti-Israelism Jerry Gordon wrote:

Both Vic Rosenthal’s Abu Yehuda  blog post, “For Obama it’s a Moral Crusade” and Brett Stephens’ Tuesday Wall Street Journal column,“The Rational Ayatollah Hypothesis” suggest that the President’s comments sinuously convey anti-Israelism.

Rosenthal gives the following evidence:

Some of the reasons I and others find Obama anti-Israel are these:

  1. His stubborn attempts to force Israel into a suicidal agreement with the Palestinians.
  2. His acceptance (regardless of his words) of a nuclear-armed Iran, and his efforts to stop Israel from acting against it.
  3. His open contempt for our Prime Minister.
  4. His taking the Turkish president’s side in the Mavi Marmara affair, and forcing PM Netanyahu to apologize to the Turks.
  5. His acceptance of Hamas claims that the IDF acted ‘disproportionally’ in Gaza (as shown by his demand for an immediate cease-fire and imposition of an arms embargo during the recent war).
  6. The aforementioned leaks about Israeli actions in Syria and elsewhere.
  7. His acceptance of the anti-Israel narrative that Israel’s right to exist rests on the Holocaust and that it must be balanced against the rights of the ‘deserving’ Palestinians (as expressed in his 2009 Cairo speech).
  8. His attempts to interfere in Israeli politics, including trying to defeat Netanyahu at the polls. It’s ironic that American money was used to help get out the presumably anti-Netanyahu Arab vote — and then Obama bitterly criticized Netanyahu for telling his supporters that they should get out and vote because the Arabs were!
  9. The double standard he displays: compare his condemnation of the PM for his election-day remark with his lack of response to the daily barrage of Israel-hatred and veneration of terrorists coming from the official Palestinian media. Or look at his expressed concern for Palestinians suffering the indignities of checkpoints against his failure to mention the almost daily Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism.

I could go on, but this should be enough to show that the belief that Obama is anti-Israel is substantive, not simply a political reflex as he suggests.

Obama and Democratic Party have now shown malice toward Israel.

This malice began when Obama was first elected to the Presidency. His remarks about embracing Israel, and its people, and having their backs was a fabrication, a political calculation to lure them into a spiraling chamber of death.

The Nazis tried to exterminate the Jews under Adolf Hitler. President Obama has given the followers of Mohammed another signal that its alright to exterminate the state of Israel – the definition of malice. Obama with one abstention has made possible the unthinkable.

Lutheran Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer, an opponent of Adolf Hitler, wrote, “Not to act is to act, not to speak is to speak.” Obama chose not to act, not to speak, at the United Nations on December 23rd, 2016.

That is his and the Democratic Party’s legacy.

RELATED ARTICLES:

John Bolton: ‘The Two-State Solution Is Dead’

With New Resolution, the UN Drives Stake into Israeli-Palestinian Peace Hopes

Our World: Obama’s war against America

Israel will share ‘evidence’ of Obama-UN collusion with Trump, ambassador says

Netanyahu rips U.S.: ‘Friends don’t take friends to the Security Council’

Israel summons US ambassador over UN vote

Obama’s War on Israel: Netanyahu’s Remarks on UN Resolution at Lighting of the First Chanukah Candle

Security Council Resolution 2334 and a Strategy for Israel

Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

Obama’s self-defeating settlements policy

U.S. May Back Additional UN Security Council Moves Tied to Paris Peace Conference

Democrats Abandoned Isreal on December 23, 2016: A date that will live in Infamy

The leader of the Democratic Party has decided to abandon Israel on December 23rd, 2016 and Democrats knew full well that he would. To understand why this happened one must read President Obama’s 2012 speech to the United Nations.

Barack Obama said in a speech before the United Nations on September 25th, 2012 that, “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”

Democrats stood by the President, knowing that he was speaking directly to the Arab world, Israel, and those in the United States and beyond, who did not fully embrace the “religion of peace.”

Democrats knew their President stood squarely on the side of Islam and Islamists and they did nothing.

President Obama commented on Benghazi stating:

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.  Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.

It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well — for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith.  We are home to Muslims who worship across our country.  We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.  We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video.  And the answer is enshrined in our laws:  Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

This about Tunisia, now a hot bed of terrorism and the home of the Berlin Christmas market slaughter:

It has been less than two years since a vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest the oppressive corruption in his country, and sparked what became known as the Arab Spring.  And since then, the world has been captivated by the transformation that’s taken place, and the United States has supported the forces of change.

We were inspired by the Tunisian protests that toppled a dictator, because we recognized our own beliefs in the aspiration of men and women who took to the streets.

This about the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt:

We insisted on change in Egypt, because our support for democracy ultimately put us on the side of the people.

This about Yemen:

We supported a transition of leadership in Yemen, because the interests of the people were no longer being served by a corrupt status quo.

This about Libya:

We intervened in Libya alongside a broad coalition, and with the mandate of the United Nations Security Council, because we had the ability to stop the slaughter of innocents, and because we believed that the aspirations of the people were more powerful than a tyrant.

And this about Syria:

And as we meet here, we again declare that the regime of Bashar al-Assad must come to an end so that the suffering of the Syrian people can stop and a new dawn can begin.

Each of these statements were honey to the ears of Democrats and the Arab world and the Muslim community.  But for those who understood his real message, knew it was a death knell for the Israelis, Syrians, Libyans, Egyptians, Yemenis, Europeans and Americans.

Obama was saying that the future belongs to Islam. History will call December 23rd, 2016 a date that will live in infamy but the foundation of the betrayal of the Christian world was laid on September 25th, 2012.

And Democrats were silent.

RELATED ARTICLE: Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

President Obama’s act of folly and betrayal of Israel

President Obama yours was the unkindest abstention in the history of the U.S. actions as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. Yesterday, in a deliberate act of retribution and in consort with four council members, two imperialist Islamic member states of the Organization of Islamic States, Malaysia and Senegal, New Zealand  and Venezuela, an ally of Iran, you abandoned the Jewish nation of Israel; this country’s only democratic ally in the Middle East, Israel.

This act of infamy was given a standing ovation by all 14 members of the Security Council. The Palestinian representative declared it a “day of victory.”

Israeli UN Ambassador Danny Danon demurred, calling it a “victory for terrorism.”

History will mark your action as an ignominious faithless act of betrayal of your oath of office and long-standing friendship of America towards the Jewish nation of Israel. A nation that shares the foundational values of our country.

Your abstention and the vote of UN Security Council approving Resolution 2334 dismembers Israel’s eternal capital of Jerusalem violating its existing right to negotiate just and secure borders.

Your act and that of the Security Council will not bring peace. Instead it will inflame Islamic terrorism against our ally Israel.

You have brought shame and dishonor on your office and reputation of this country and its people you were elected to faithfully serve.Your legacy following the end of your final term in office is forever tarnished by this act of folly.

The irony of your misguided conduct comes on the eve of the Jewish Festival of Hanukkah, meaning ‘consecration’, celebrating the victory two millenia ago by the Maccabees, the few against the many, blessed by Ha Shem. These warrior priests rose up with the cry of the High Priest Mattisyahu, “whoever is for for God, follow me.” Their mortal combat achieved a victory over the foreign tyrannyof Syrian-Greek despot, Antiochus, occupying ancient Judea. It was a victory in furtherance of the inalienable right of freedom to worship emblazoned in the First Amendment of our Constitution. An ancient victory that also affirmed the State of Israel’s right to the land of its Jewish fore-bearers and descendants.

Your action Friday , December 23, 2016 suborned that ancient legacy that this country was founded on to uphold 234 years ago with fight for Independence from another occupying tyranny.

It will now be left to a new Congress and your successor as President to redress your betrayal of our country and ally Israel.

Full text of UNSC resolution, approved Dec. 23, demanding Israel stop all settlement activity

The Times of Israel

Approved by 14-0, with US abstaining, text seeks action ‘to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperiling the two-state solution’

Text of Egyptian-drafted resolution 2334 on settlements, approved by the UN Security Council, on December 23, 2016.

The Security Council,

Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,

Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,

Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,

Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,

Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,

Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,

Israel's UN ambassador Danny Danon addresses the Security Council on October 19, 2016. (UN Photo)

Israel’s UN ambassador Danny Danon addresses the Security Council on October 19, 2016. (UN Photo)

Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,

1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;

5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;

6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;

7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;

8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;

10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;

11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;

12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;

13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

‘The Crescent Must be Above the Cross’: Muslim Persecution of Christians 2016

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

DHS Loses Thousands of ‘Keys to the Kingdom’

President-Elect Donald Trump’s campaign promise to build a wall to separate the United States from Mexico resonated with many Americans and galvanized their support, which ultimately enabled him to win the election.  These voters want to prevent narcotics and illegal aliens and the criminals and terrorists among them from flowing freely into the United States.

Indeed, that porous border must be made secure.  However, simply securing that problematic border would not end the immigration crisis.  Indeed, the lack of security along the southwest border had nothing to do with the ability of the 9/11 hijacker-terrorists to enter the United States nor did that border play a role in the great majority of terrorists who have entered the United States prior to the attacks of 9/11 or after those deadly attacks.

While illegal immigration represents a huge multi-faceted challenge and, indeed threat, to America and Americans, the multiple failures of the legal immigration system is no less problematic.

Many politicians have said that after the Trump administration secures the southwest border and removes the estimated two to three million criminal aliens that we should then consider how to address the remaining millions of illegal aliens.  In reality, in addition to removing the criminal aliens the Trump administration must take immediate and decisive steps to address the abject lack of integrity in the legal immigration system that is utterly unable to deal with its current workload let alone deal with any further increases of applications.

Green Cards, also known as Alien Registration Receipt Cards, are issued to provide reliable documentation that attests to aliens granted lawful immigrant status.  These cards serve many purposes including providing prima facia evidence of the bearer’s identity as well as his or her immigration status that enables that individual to be lawfully employed in the United States.

Green Cards also enable aliens to enter the United States through ports of entry not unlike a passport.  Green Cards can also serve as required ID to enable the bearer to board airliners and have access to corporate and government office buildings and facilities.

In a very real sense, given the multitude of lawful uses for these documents, Green Cards represent the “Keys to the Kingdom” and consequently have serious national security implications.

On November 21, 2016 OIG (the Office of the Inspector General) of the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) issued a press release on the continuing failures of United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to address numerous deficiencies in the process by which Green Cards are issued.

The relatively bland title of the press release, “DHS OIG Finds USCIS Continues to Struggle to Ensure Proper Green Card Issuance” does not convey the true seriousness of the egregious examples of incompetence and ineptitude reported upon in that press release or the actual report of the investigation conducted by the OIG, “Better Safeguards Are Needed in USCIS Green Card Issuance: (OIG 17-11).”

To begin with, here is the full text of the press release:

A new Department of Homeland Security Office of Inspector General (DHS OIG) report concludes that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) continues to struggle to ensure proper Green Card issuance. The audit was conducted as a follow-up to a March 2016 report where where the DHS OIG disclosed that USCIS had sent potentially hundreds of Green Cards to the wrong addresses.

In fact, the problem was far worse than originally thought. Over the last 3 years, USCIS produced at least 19,000 cards that included incorrect information or were issued in duplicate. Additional mistakes included over 2,400 immigrants approved for 2-year conditional residence status being inadvertently issued cards with 10-year expiration dates. The agency also received over 200,000 reports of cards potentially misdelivered, or not being delivered to approved applicants.

The majority of the card issuance errors were due to the flawed design and functionality problems in the agency’s Electronic Immigration System (ELIS). The delays and cost overruns of the ELIS system have been documented in previous OIG reports. Although USCIS conducted a number of efforts to recover the inappropriately issued and missing cards, its efforts to address the errors have been inadequate.

“It appears that thousands of Green Cards have simply gone missing. In the wrong hands, Green Cards may enable terrorists, criminals, and undocumented aliens to remain in the United States,” said Inspector General Roth. “It is vital that USCIS ensure better tools and procedures are in place to mitigate such risks.”

The preceding paragraph contained in the OIG press release noted that “In the wrong hands, Green Cards may enable terrorists, criminals, and undocumented aliens to remain in the United States.”  Yet efforts to flag those cards at ports of entry through the computer system employed by CBP (Customs and Border Protection) Inspectors, have not been consistently implemented.  Consequently, aliens improperly issued those cards may still be able to use them to enter the United States.

The press release referenced a previous report issued in March 2016.  That report, “USCIS Automation of Immigration Benefits Processing Remains Ineffective” was also given a nondescript title that downplayed the national security implications of these failures.

These problems are not new but are decades old and have been getting increasingly worse as USCIS is forced to adjudicate a growing avalanche of applications for various immigration benefits including applications filed by aliens for political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even United States citizenship.

In fact, I testified at a hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on March 19, 2002 when it was discovered that two of the 9/11 terrorists, Mohammed Atta (the ringleader) and Marwan al-Shehhi had been granted authorization to attend flight school in the United States six months after the terror attacks. The topic of that hearing was, “INS’S March 2002 Notification Of Approval Of Change Of Status For Pilot Training For Terrorist Hijackers Mohammed Atta And Marwan Al-Shehhi.”

The hearing created a media circus and was covered by C-SPAN.  The C-SPAN video is worth watching.

Every member of Congress that participated in that hearing was indignant about this unbelievable failure of the immigration system.

However, virtually none of the promises made during that hearing, nearly 15 years ago, has been kept to this very day, allowing history to repeat itself over and over again.

Aliens who seek to naturalize are supposed to be subjected to a thorough investigation to determine if they possess, “Good Moral Character.”  however, those investigations are rarely, if ever conducted.  Indeed, even face-to-face interviews of these applicants have often been dispensed with.

I addressed the significance of the naturalization process in terms of national security in my article, “The Immigration Factor – Naturalized U.S. Citizen Added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists List.”

Additionally, these disturbing reports focus purely on the multitude of failures of the mechanics of the system for issuing Green Cards to aliens but do not address the issue of aliens who commit fraud.

On May 30, 2013, UPI posted a report about an alleged former member of Hezbollah successfully immigrating the United States by allegedly concealing his terrorist background as noted in this headline, “Immigrant allegedly failed to reveal Hezbollah membership.”  That immigrant was ultimately naturalized and held a security clearance.

On December 6, 2014 Fox News published a report, “Saudi-born US naval engineer allegedly gave undercover agent info on how to sink carrier” that focused on how Mostafa Ahmed Awwad was educated in the United States and became a naturalized U.S. citizen, agreed to provide an FBI undercover agent with the plans of the Gerald R. Ford, a 13 billion dollar aircraft carrier that was still under construction.  Allegedly Awwad even told the undercover agent where the ship would be most vulnerable to being sunk by a missile strike.

On February 11, 2014, a hearing was conducted by the House Judiciary Committee on the issue: “Asylum Fraud: Abusing America’s Compassion?”

On December 12, 2013, an additional hearing was conducted on the issue: “Asylum Abuse: Is it Overwhelming our Borders?”  This hearing focused on the impact on our borders when, in reality the asylum abuse impacts each and every state.

Of course limiting the hearing to the issue of only “our borders” coincides neatly with the myth that all that our nation needs to do in preparation for a massive amnesty program, likely involving tens of millions of illegal aliens, is to “secure our southern border.”

I wrote about this issue in my February 5, 2015 article, “The ‘Secure Our Border First Act’ Deception » Why it’s no solution to the immigration crisis.”

Donald Trump has promised to “Drain the Swamp” as he referred to the filth and corruption of our current political system.  All Americans should be cheering him on.  However, he must also turn his attention to another “swamp” the Department of Homeland Security or, as I have come to refer to it, the “Department of Homeland Surrender,” especially where all of the immigration components of that horrifically overwhelmed and inept agency are concerned.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in FrontPage Magazine.

In past two years Ten Muslim terrorists slipped through the U.S. immigration process

“Ten Times in Past Two Years Terrorists Slipped Through Immigration Process into U.S.,” by Matthew Boyle, Breitbart, September 20, 2016:

NEW YORK CITY, New York — In the wake of the terrorist attacks in New York City and Minnesota during the weekend, the focus of the national debate has again shifted back to America’s enemies exploiting weaknesses in U.S. immigration screening processes to get into the country to attack the United States.

While President Barack Obama’s administration, and his would-be successor, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton, have promised to increase the amount of people they bring into the United States through immigration, refugee, and asylum programs, the Republican nominee for president, Donald J. Trump, has promised to put the brakes on allowing potential terrorists into the United States.

Below is a by-no-means comprehensive list of at least ten times in the last couple years—there are certainly many more instances—that terrorists have exploited the Obama-Clinton immigration weaknesses to get into the United States. This is the first in a series of stories that will examine specific examples on this front.

1.) Eritrean Plans Terror in Ohio

Twenty-one-year-old Munir Abdulkader of West Chester, Ohio, pleads guilty, according to the Department of Justice, “to attempting to kill officers and employees of the United States, providing material support to the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), a designated foreign terrorist organization, and possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence.”

According to the Columbus Dispatch, Abdulkader is a “native of Eritrea in east Africa,” who “became a citizen of the United States in September 2006.”

He hit law enforcement’s radar while a student at Xavier University in Cincinnati when he was posting messages on Twitter that the Columbus Dispatch said were “seen as sympathetic to Islamic State fighters.”

“On a Twitter account that began in July 2014 and continued into 2015, Abdulkader posted an IS training video, lamented that his cousin had died fighting for IS and expressed his desire to travel and join the terrorist insurgency,” James Steinbauerwrote in the Columbus Dispatch in July. He added:

Abdulkader also stated his wish to attain martyrdom. From March to mid-April 2015, Abdulkader began speaking with a confidential source about his intentions to travel to Syria and fight for the insurgency. He secured a passport, saved money for the trip and began making travel plans, but postponed the trip until May 2015 because of increased arrests of individuals traveling to join IS. During May 2015, Abdulkader communicated with one or more people overseas who were tied to IS. One, a member of IS identified as Junaid Hussein, encouraged Abdulkader to commit terrorist attacks in the United States before going to Syria. IS has advocated for lone-wolf jihadis and extremists to conduct attacks in their home countries.

In his communications with Hussein, the Islamic State recruiter encouraged the Eritrean immigrant—according to the Justice Department—“to plan and execute a violent attack within the United States.”

“Abdulkader communicated with Hussein and the CHS [confidential human source] about a plan to kill an identified military employee on account of his position with the U.S. government,” the Justice Department said in a press release. “The plan included abducting the employee at the employee’s home and filming the execution. After killing the employee, Abdulkader planned to perpetrate a violent attack on a police station in the Southern District of Ohio using firearms and Molotov cocktails.”

None of this would have been possible if the United States government had not let this Eritrean man into the United States in the first place.

2.) Virginia Man? Not Quite.

Also back in July, The Washington Post’s Rachel Weiner and Joe Helm detailed the story of Mohamed Bailor Jalloh—an immigrant from Sierra Leone—who was caught plotting a terrorist attack in support of the Islamic State in Virginia.

“When Mohamed Bailor Jalloh walked into the Blue Ridge Arsenal gun store and indoor target range in Chantilly, Va., on Friday to purchase a Bushmaster AR-15 rifle, he had no idea that his every move was being monitored by the FBI,” Weiner and Helm wrote on July 5. “Jalloh, 26, spent about 10 minutes in the shop before attempting to buy the assault weapon, but he was told that he did not have the required three forms of identification to make the purchase, said Earl Curtis, the store’s owner. Jalloh told employees that he would return.”

Jalloh had apparently been a former member of the Virginia National Guard—and that was how The Washington Post’s headline identified him. What the leading newspaper did not say until 16 paragraphs into the article is that Jalloh is not from the United States.

“Jalloh, a native of Sierra Leone, is a U.S. citizen,” the Post wrote.

That’s all the nation’s capitol’s major newspaper said in that story about his immigration history.

According to Justice Department documents, Jalloh was born in Sierra Leone—a West African nation that is predominantly Muslim—and actually after becoming naturalized later as a U.S. citizen traveled back to Sierra Leone in 2015. In addition to disclosing that he listened to lectures from Anwar Al-Awlaki, Jalloh—according to court records available of the Department of Justice’s website—told a confidential human source for federal law enforcement he is “originally from Sierra Leone and has been a Muslim his entire life.” During his trip back to his home nation of Sierra Leone, federal authorities—according to the court records—believed he had contact with representatives for the Islamic State. He was gone for months.

“A review of U.S. Customs and Border Protection travel records indicated JALLOH departed the United States on or about June 11, 2015 via John F. Kennedy International Airport with a final destination of Sierra Leone,” the court document, filed by an FBI agent, says, continuing:

On or about January 16, 2016, JALLOH returned to the United States from Sierra Leone via John F. Kennedy International Airport. Based on the length of time JALLOH was overseas for this trip and the comments made by JALLOH to CHS1 [confidential human source number one] on or about April 9, 2016, I believe it was during this overseas trip that JALLOH met ISIL members in Nigeria and first established contact with UCCl [un-indicted co-conspirator number one].

But it all started, of course, when the U.S. government decided to let this guy into the United States in the first place.

3.) Kenyan Somali ‘Refugee’ — Or Minnesota Man? — Convicted on Terrorism Charges

Guled Ali Omar, a Somalian born in a refugee camp in Kenya but later admitted into the United States as a refugee and subsequently granted citizenship by the U.S. government, was one of three “Minnesota Men” convicted in June of conspiring to join the Islamic State and “commit murder in Syria.”

“Guled Ali Omar, Abdurahman Yasin Daud and Mohamed Abdihamid Farah were convicted by a federal jury today of conspiring to commit murder in Syria on behalf of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and to provide material support to the designated foreign terrorist organization,” the Justice Department announced on June 3. “Omar was also convicted of one count of attempted financial aid fraud, and Farah was also convicted of one count of perjury and providing a false statement.”

Omar’s case is particularly interesting. His family, in the wake of his conviction, was given fawning coverage by local Minnesota media. In a large profile in the MinneapolisStarTribune, his mother Fadumo Hussein was described as “heartbroken” and portrayed as having her “home” being “shadowed” by “the question of terrorism” for years.

The local newspaper paints the FBI agents who raided their home as jackbooted thugs who disrupted their life.

“On Sunday morning, that question once again stormed into her life, when FBI agents crashed through the door of her south Minneapolis house in search of her youngest son, Guled Omar,” Paul McEnroe wrote in the Star Tribune on April 21, 2015, adding:

Rousting her from sleep, the agents had surrounded the house about 9 a.m. and then stormed in to arrest her 20-year-old son. The young man, who works as a security guard for Target and attends community college part-time, is now charged with leading a secret life centered on plotting with five friends to leave the United States in order to fight with terrorists in Syria and Iraq.

Deeper in the story, though, the StarTribune lets it slip: Omar was not just any typical “Minnesota Man.”

The newspaper quotes the mother as saying, “Guled was born by myself under a tree” during their time “spent in a Kenyan refugee camp.” Never mind that this is Hussein’s second—not her first, her second—son who has been connected with radical Islamic terrorism, the Minneapolis StarTribune focuses on how Hussein, about Omar, was “protesting his innocence.”

“Still reeling from the weekend’s trauma, a tearful Hussein sat on her couch Monday morning and tried to come to grips with now losing her second son to the nationwide investigation of terrorist recruitment among Somali-Americans,” McEnroe wrote:

Omar is the youngest brother of indicted fugitive Ahmed Ali Omar, who left the U.S. in late 2007 as part of the first wave of Somali-Americans in the Twin Cities to fight for Al-Shabab in Somalia. Hussein said she hasn’t heard from Ahmed since — that he’s simply disappeared off the family’s radar. Now, she faces the prospect of losing Guled too, through a terrorism trial or a guilty plea that, either way, could put him in prison for decades.

While the StarTribune article, even further down, tells readers finally that Hussein is a “naturalized U.S. citizen,” it says nothing of the immigration status of Omar. For that information—whether or not Omar was granted U.S. citizenship by the government after coming to the United States—readers need to turn to another newspaper: TheChicago Tribune. More than ten paragraphs into that article from the Tribune wire service, readers finally learn: The United States government gave this man citizenship.

“All six are of Somali descent. Daud is a permanent resident, and Guled is a naturalized citizen,” the paper wrote of the six charged men. “The others were born in the U.S.”

To the wire service’s credit, though, it does—a few paragraphs deep—admit there is a problem in Minnesota:

The Minneapolis area is home to the largest concentration of Somali immigrants in the U.S. Since 2007, more than 22 young Somali men have also traveled from Minnesota to Somalia to join the militant group al-Shabab, which is also listed by the U.S. State Department as fomenting terrorism. Authorities have said a handful of Minnesota residents have traveled to Syria to fight with militants in the past year, and at least one has died.

4.) Legal Permanent Resident Abdurahman Yasin Daud Moves In Next Door

One of the others charged in the case in the third example—Abdurahman Yasin Daud—is a native Somalian who wound up in Minnesota, thanks to the U.S. government. But not only was he allowed into the country, according to the Tribune wire service piece in the Chicago Tribune, he was granted “permanent resident” status by the U.S. government.

Maybe if federal policy did not let people like this into the United States in the first place, FBI agents would not have to chase people like Daud and his buddies across the country as they plot to leave the United States to join the Islamic State in Syria.

In fact, federal law enforcement agents spent years—years—building this case.

Omar and two other members of the conspiracy also made an attempt to join ISIL by traveling across the U.S.–Mexico border near San Diego in May 2014, but failed when members of Omar’s family prevented his travel.

“In October 2014, members of the conspiracy communicated with ‘Antar,’ a self-described member of ISIL in Syria, about how best to travel to Syria to join ISIL,” the Justice Department said in a press release, adding:

Members of the conspiracy met with one another to discuss routes, methods and the timing of leaving the United States to join ISIL in Syria. Omar again attempted to join ISIL in Syria on Nov. 6, 2014, by flying from Minneapolis/St. Paul International Airport to San Diego, crossing the border into Mexico and traveling onward to Syria. Before he could board the flight in Minnesota, Omar was stopped at the airport and prevented from boarding the plane. In order to fund this second attempt to join ISIL in Syria, Omar intended to use federal financial aid provided to him by the U.S. Department of Education to attend college. Also in November 2014, Farah and three of his co-conspirators, Zacharia Abdurahman, Hanad Musse and Hamza Ahmed, took a bus from Minneapolis to New York City and attempted to board flights to Europe with an eventual destination of Syria. Federal agents in New York prevented the four from traveling abroad. In April 2015, Daud and Farah drove from Minneapolis to San Diego, where they intended to purchase fake passports, cross the border into Mexico and travel to Syria to join ISIL. Unbeknownst to them, the individual from whom they purchased the fake passports was a law enforcement officer and both were arrested by federal agents immediately after obtaining the phony travel documents.

5.) Sudanese Man Caught in Virginia Conspiring to Join Islamic State

While the January 16 press release from the Department of Justice was headlined “Two Virginia Men Charged with Terrorism Offenses Related to Attempted Travel to Syria to Join ISIL,” it turns out one of these “Virginia men” was actually an immigrant from the great nation of Sudan.

Mahmoud Amin Mohamed Elhassan—whom the DOJ admits “ is a legal permanent U.S. resident originally from Sudan,” but was living in Woodbridge, Virginia—was “charged with aiding and abetting [his friend Joseph Hassan]  Farrokh’s attempt to provide material support and resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization.” Farrokh was born in Pennsylvania.

Elhassan, the Sudanese man, according to a later release from the DOJ announcing his indictment on May 27, was a taxi driver who used his taxi to try to help Farrokh get to Syria to join the Islamic State.

“In furtherance of the conspiracy, on Jan. 15, 2016, Elhassan drove Farrokh to Richmond in order to enable Farrokh to fly to overseas to join ISIL,” the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Eastern District of Virginia announced in the indictment press release:

According to the indictment, Elhassan also attempted to provide material support or resources to ISIL by aiding and abetting the attempt of Farrokh to join ISIL.  Elhassan’s aiding and abetting included introducing Farrokh to an individual that Elhassan believed could facilitate Farrokh’s travel to the Islamic State; driving Farrokh from Farrokh’s home to Richmond in Elhassan’s taxi cab so that Farrokh could embark on his travel to join ISIL; and making false statements to the FBI about Farrokh’s travel in order to hinder the government’s investigation of Farrokh’s travel. According to the indictment, Elhassan knowingly, unlawfully, and willfully made material false, fictitious, and fraudulent statements and representations in a matter involving international terrorism, including: On Jan. 15, 2016, Elhassan falsely stated to FBI agents that Farrokh had flown out of Dulles Airport earlier that day on a flight to California to attend a funeral; that Farrokh had said that he would be back in about two weeks; that neither he nor Farrokh supported the ISIL; and neither he nor Farrokh ever tried to find someone to help them get to ISIL.

Sudan is a northeastern African nation that is run by a legal system operating based on Sharia law, something that has been a source of controversy for the nation as it has handed out death sentences to those who engage in “apostasy.”

“Twenty-five Muslim men, including three teenagers, are facing the death penalty in Sudan after being charged with apostasy for following the wrong version of Islam,” TheGuardian reported last December.

That is where Elhassan came from, before the U.S. government allowed him into America.

6.) Iraqi in Texas Sentenced to Four Years in U.S. Prison on Terror Charges

Bilal Abood, a 38-year-old Iraqi man who lives in Mesquite, Texas, was sentenced to 48 months in prison on May 25 for lying to the Feds about terrorism.

In this case, the Justice Department notes right up front that he was born in Iraq—but is now a U.S. citizen. Abood had traveled to Syria from Texas—and then back—and had pledged allegiance to Abu Bakr Al-Badhdadi, the leader of the Islamic State.

“Abood admitted that on March 29, 2013, he attempted to depart the United States at Dallas Fort Worth International Airport, but was not allowed to board the international flight,” the Justice Department press release said. It continued:

While at the airport, FBI special agents asked Abood about his planned travel and he stated he was merely planning to travel to Iraq to visit family. During a subsequent interview, Abood admitted to FBI special agents that his intent was to travel to Syria to fight the regime of Bashar al-Assad. On approximately April 29, 2013, Abood left the United States through Mexico and traveled through various countries into Syria. On Sept. 16, 2013, Abood returned to the United States and admitted to FBI special agents that he had traveled to Syria, but he denied supporting any terrorist groups. A search warrant was executed on Abood’s computer on July 9, 2014. A review of that computer revealed that on approximately June 19, 2014, Abood stated, while using his Twitter handle @ibnalislaam, “I pledge obedience to the Caliphate Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.” Abood admitted that he knew that al-Baghdadi is the self-proclaimed leader of ISIL and was designated as a specially designated global terrorist on Oct. 4, 2011, and remains so to date. Abood also admitted that on April 14, 2015, FBI special agents advised him that lying to a federal agent is a crime. He further admitted that on that date, he falsely told FBI special agents that he had never pledged allegiance to al-Baghdadi and that he was aware that the agents were investigating a matter that they suspected could involve international terrorism.

What the Justice Department doesn’t say in this release, or a prior one, is how this Iraqi man got into the United States—and obtained U.S. citizenship—in the first place.

For that, we turn to The Dallas Morning News, which details how Abood helped U.S. armed forces in Iraq as a translator during the Iraq war—and then took advantage of a special program for such translators.

“Abood, a translator for American forces during the Iraq War, left Iraq in 2009 to take advantage of a rare opportunity for U.S. Army interpreters to become American citizens,” The Dallas Morning News’ Kevin Krause wrote on May 25, 2016, continuing:

Abood, who speaks Arabic, said during testimony Wednesday that he was offered the interpreter job after warning U.S. troops that large weapons caches were being kept inside Iraqi schools. He said he also worked as a U.S. military contractor on civil affairs projects, such as building schools and roads. He joined the Army in 2010 and went through basic training at Fort Jackson, S.C. Abood said he trained U.S. troops on how to deal with Iraqi culture and customs. He said he left the Army because it wouldn’t allow him to return to Iraq to see his sick mother. Abood said he settled in an apartment in Mesquite around 2010 where he lived with his common law wife and worked two jobs — one for UPS and the other as a security guard. He said he saved enough money to buy his mother a house in Iraq.

There is much more. Read the rest here.

RELATED ARTICLES:

NYC jihad bomber became “way more religious” after trip to Afghanistan

NYC Mayor: Islamic terror “vanishingly rare,” calls for more Muslim migrants

Washington, D.C.: August 28th ‘Rally 4 Refugees’ funded by George Soros Tides Foundation

You have got to hand it to them (to the likes of George Soros and big progressive funders like the Tides Foundation), they know how to promote a propaganda campaign.  
Rally 4 refugees logo

We have told you on innumerable occasions that in September Barack Hussein Obama will be leading a major effort at the United Nations to open our gates even wider for hundreds of thousands of third world migrants to be placed in your towns. (We learned yesterday that ORR is gearing up to take care of over 200,000 “humanitarian arrivals.”)

September is also the month when the Administration (Obama and Sec. of State Kerry) will make their final determination for the US Refugee Admissions Program and submit their plan for fiscal year 2017. They said last year that they were shooting for 100,000 refugees for FY17, but we expect the number to be much higher.

The buck stops with Speaker Paul Ryan!

And, frankly there is only one person who is now in the catbird seat to stop them this fall!—Speaker Paul Ryan.  (I know your hearts are sinking, but that is the cold hard truth.)  Only Congress can stop them by not granting the money needed to place hundreds of thousands of needy people, some from countries that hate us, in over 200 American towns (through 350 subcontractor offices).

Now here they go attempting to soften up Congress by rallying in Washington for refugees on August 28th!

They are promoting their rally as a “collective voice against intolerance!”  From DCRally4Refugees (hat tip: Cathy):

In the midst of the greatest refugee crisis since WWII, advocates from across the country will gather at DCRally4Refugees, August 28, 2016 at the outdoor Sylvan Theater at the Washington Monument on the National Mall in Washington, DC, 10:00 AM – 2:30 PM (rain or shine).

The rally will raise awareness about the magnitude of the global refugee crisis, encourage advocacy and U.S. action to alleviate suffering through relief efforts and support, and stand in solidarity with refugees and displaced people worldwide. Anyone is encouraged to join the #SeaOfOrange, buy a T-shirt, attend the historic rally and use #DCRally4Refugees to show support.

Steps from the U.S. Capitol, DCRally4Refugees will call on the U.S. to provide more refugee resettlement and increased support to countries and organizations already involved, support proven relief efforts overseas, and offer resources for those who wish to help, raising a collective voice against intolerance.  [Message is clear, if you are concerned about the economic costs and the security for your community you are a hateful, intolerant boob!—ed]

Please read their website carefully.  They want people to attend (obviously), but they also want the Open Borders agitators across the country to send postcards to Congress, send money to them (LOL! through the already massively funded Tides Foundation) and to buy their orange T-shirts (these are master marketers!).

Here is the postcard they have prepared for their people to send to Congress.  If you can’t read the list of supporting groups click on the link above.  Most of the major federal resettlement contractors are listed.  And, although there are other Catholic groups, I’m not seeing the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (hmmm?).  What is up with that? Are you giving them too much guff in your parishes?

I still have a hard time understanding how decent concerned Christians and Jews have joined the globalists and are willing to help multinational corporations import cheap (slave!) labor! (Confirmed on my 30 day tour of the heartland).

Screenshot (1)

Go here and see that they are also planning events around the country!

Only two things you must do now!

So here are the primary things you need to do in the coming weeks (in addition to putting out fires where you live) — tell Speaker Ryan and your member of Congress to cut the funding for any expansion of the UN/US State Department Refugee Admissions Program and elect Donald Trump as the next President of the United States.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Leftist Activists Crash Trump Fundraiser, Attack Motorcade, Assault Trump Supporters in Violent ‘Gauntlet’

Memo: Soros Group Funded ‘Opposition Research’ On Critics Of Radical Islam

Polls: Most Americans do not want Obama to bring in Syrians and distribute them around the US

The Jewish Press: DC Leaks Publishes George Soros’ Files Showing Millions Contributed to Anti-Israel Causes

“Panic” about Muslim migration to Europe is justified says scholar

It couldn’t get worse (or could it?) for Twin Falls defenders of the Muslim influx there

Twin Falls, Idaho again! It has gotten worse! Now three refugee criminal arrests since June

Deja vu: Obama’s $400 Million and Carter’s $7.9 Billion gifts to Iran by Dr. Mike Evans

NEW YORK, New York /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — Shortly after 4:00 A.M. on Inauguration Day, January 20, 1981, the administration of then-President Jimmy Carter relinquished $7.977 billion to the Iranians. According to one source, the transfer required fourteen banks and the participation of five nations acting concurrently.

When the Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini returned to Iran on February 1, 1979 it was with the unbridled determination to launch a revolution. His real coup d’état in the days following the overthrow of the Shah turned out to be the incarceration of fifty-two American hostages for the final 444 days of the Carter administration.

The Iranians were relentless in the pursuit of the Shah’s assets numbering in the billions, purported to be stashed in American banks. In a move seemingly designed to further insult the United States, Khomeini’s negotiators demanded a total of $24 billion be transferred to a bank in Algeria. On the heels of the ridiculous stipulation, the Iranians distributed a synopsis of their demands.

The U.S. retaliated by printing a summation of its own correspondence with the rogue nation. The deadlock between the two countries seemed insurmountable until January 15, 1981. Just days before Carter was to leave office, Iran capitulated and agreed to Carter’s demands to pay off loans owned to U.S. banks. In marathon sessions new drafts were produced, new documents drawn, and the Bank of England was approved as the repository of escrow funds.

After the election of Ronald Reagan in November 1980, Carter became more determined than ever to secure the release of the hostages on his watch. He was successful, but barely. During marathon negotiating sessions in the wee hours of January 20, 1981, the Bank of England was approved as the repository of escrow funds, and shortly after 4:00 AM on Inauguration Day, the Carter administration relinquished $7.977 billion to the Iranians. According to one source, the transfer required fourteen banks and the participation of five nations acting concurrently.

As a final insult to President Carter, the Iranians refused to release the hostages until after President-electRonald Reagan was sworn in as 40th President of the United States. Headlines around the world screamed, “Tehran Releases U.S. Hostages after 444 Days of Captivity.

Why is this fact important to us in 2016? Why does the life and presidency of Jimmy Carter matter in the twenty-first century? It is because the same Liberal Left which accepted Carter’s substance-starved campaign also bought into Obama’s equally ambiguous rhetoric.

In January of this year, the administration of President Barack Obama ordered a clandestine transfer of $400 million to the same terrorist state. On the morning of January 17, a transport plane was loaded with skids laden with stacks of currency—among them euros and francs.

The unidentified aircraft departed for Tehran where the cargo was offloaded. According to Mr. Obama, this was only the first payment on an agreed $1.7 billion settlement his administration contracted with Iran in the settlement of a failed arms deal signed by Reza Pahlavi, the shah of Iran. According to White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, “This $400 million is actually money that the Iranians had paid into a US account in 1979 as part of a transaction to procure military equipment. That military equipment, as it relates to the $400 million, was not provided to the Iranians in 1979 because the shah of Iran was overthrown.”

The president contended that the timing of the transfer had nothing to do with the hostage release, or with the signing of the benchmark nuclear accords reached the previous summer. This was despite the inference from some Iranian officials that the transaction was a payment of ransom. According to Mr. Obama’s statement, “With the nuclear deal done, prisoners released, the time was right to resolve this dispute as well.”

John Kirby, State Department spokesperson, took the same approach when he reiterated, “As we’ve made clear, the negotiations over the settlement of an outstanding claim…were completely separate from the discussions about returning our American citizens home….Not only were the two negotiations separate, they were conducted by different teams on each side, including, in the case of The Hague claims, by technical experts involved in these negotiations for many years.”

Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas, an outspoken opponent of the nuclear accord with Iran, said, “This break with longstanding U.S. policy put a price on the head of Americans, and has led Iran to continue its illegal seizures” of U.S. citizens. Apparently the sum offered was not enough to halt the seizure of other Americans, Canadians, and U.K. citizens of Iranian descent.

Iranian Revolutionary Guard commanders boasted at the time that the Americans had succumbed to Iranian pressure. General Mohammad Reza Naghdi, commander of the Republican Guard’s Basij militia crowed, “Taking this much money back was in return for the release of the American spies.”

One has to wonder just where this windfall will be utilized. Iran is one of the world’s largest state sponsors of terror organizations—Hezbollah, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Houthi rebels in Yemen, Shiite militants inBahrain and Iraq, and even some members of al Qaeda. Its famed Republican Guards have been dispatched to Syria in support of Bashar al-Assad’s civil war.

Of course, CIA director John Brennan assures the American public that the funds are being used to provide relief for the Iranian people. He reiterated, “The money, the revenue that’s flowing into Iran is being used to support its currency, to provide moneys to the departments and agencies, build up its infrastructure.”

Not all U.S. hostages currently held by Iran were released. The whereabouts of FBI agent Robert Levinson are unknown. Now being held in Iran are Siamak Namazi and his elderly father, Baqeru, and another man thought to be Reza Shahini. There is speculation that these men, and perhaps more, will be the core of another prisoner exchange payment before the end of Obama’s White House stay. This is particularly true in light of a demand for $2 billion held since 2009.

Representative James Lankford of Oklahoma co-wrote a bill that would prevent Mr. Obama from handing over cash to the Iranian government. He said, “President Obama’s…payment to Iran in January, which we now know will fund Iran’s military expansion, is an appalling example of executive branch governance…Subsidizing Iran’s military is perhaps the worst use of taxpayer dollars ever by an American president.”

Barack Obama’s presidency has been dominated by debate between the Republican and Democratic parties over Middle East policy, as it relates to the entire Middle East and especially the Persian Gulf states. It is there, in Israel, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, that the epicenter of the war on terror may be found, and it is from there that its ripples will continue to spread across the globe.

Like his political role-model, Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama is captivating, eloquent, amiable, and unruffled. Obama spoke little during his campaign of his political viewpoint. It was said of Carter and Obama that they seem “cut of identical cloth.…Obama quickly corrects statements which show how he truly feels.…It seems that Obama feels himself morally superior to those in politics today, much like Carter did thirty years ago.…Barack Obama has never sought bipartisanship. He embraces leftism completely…Barack Obama was the next Jimmy Carter.”

The United States paid an exceedingly high price for the years Carter practiced being presidential; we have yet to learn just what the presidency of Barack Obama will have cost the American people.

RELATED ARTICLE: Hamas Diverts Millions From U.S.-Based NGO To Finance Terrorist Capabilities

EDITORS NOTE: Dr. Michael Evans is a #1 New York Times bestselling author. His book, Islamic Infidels, is available at www.Timeworthybooks.com.

Obama Administration turning ‘Sanctuary Cities’ into ‘Safe Zones’

christina ziegler

Christian Ziegler

Christian Ziegler, State Committeeman, Sarasota County, in an email writes:

Just when I thought that the Federal Government couldn’t act more ridiculous than allowing “Sanctuary Cities” to harbor law-breakers, the U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency recently put out a “How To” guide to avoid enforcement by instituting “Safe Zones” for illegal aliens. These “Safe Zones” have been put in place to allow law-breakers the ability to “participate in activities” or “utilize services” in our country “without fear or hesitation”.

Yes, you read that right. Our Federal Government has put out instructions on how to avoid justice for committing a federal crime. The continued encouragement of lawlessness and refusal to hold individuals accountable for their actions by our Federal Government is both concerning and infuriating.

It’s time that we do something about this and it’s just another reason why we must elect Donald Trump and defeat Hillary Clinton in November. Of all of the issues discussed during this election cycle, I believe that the illegal immigration issue is one of the most important issues facing our country. And while Donald Trump has made it clear that we must build a wall and hold illegal aliens accountable for breaking our laws, Hillary Clinton allowed numerous illegal aliens, including one facing a deportation order, to speak during the DNC Convention and made it clear she’s running for Obama’s 3rd term.

Please take a moment to read the article (below) and reply back with any thoughts that you may have on this issue!


U.S. Border Protection Agcy. Advertises SAFE ZONES for Illegal Aliens

Just about any illegal alien can avoid arrest by following these simple rules, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) advertises in a post on its website’s homepage.

Providing a virtual “how-to” guide for illegal aliens in its “Sensitive Locations FAQs,”  CBP explains that immigration laws are not to be enforced at any of a wide range of designated “sensitive locations” – so that illegal aliens may be “free” to live their lives “without fear or hesitation”:

“The policies provide that enforcement actions at or focused on sensitive locations such as schools, places of worship, and hospitals should generally be avoided, and that such actions may only take place when (a) prior approval is obtained from an appropriate supervisory official, or (b) there are exigent circumstances necessitating immediate action without supervisor approval.  The policies are meant to ensure that ICE and CBP officers and agents exercise sound judgment when enforcing federal law at or focused on sensitive locations, to enhance the public understanding and trust, and to ensure that people seeking toparticipate in activities or utilize services provided at any sensitive location are free to do so, without fear or hesitation.”

“This policy is designed to ensure that these enforcement actions do not occurat nor are focused on sensitive locations such as schools and churches” without meeting special exceptions, the ICE Sensitive Locations Policy states.

Locations covered by these policies include, but not be limited to:

  • Schools, such as known and licensed daycares, pre-schools and other early learning programs; primary schools; secondary schools; post-secondary schools up to and including colleges and universities; as well as scholastic or education-related activities or events, and school bus stopsthat are marked and/or known to the officer, during periods when school children are present at the stop;
  • Medical treatment and health care facilities, such as hospitals, doctors’ offices, accredited health clinics, and emergent or urgent care facilities;
  • Places of worship, such as churches, synagogues, mosques, and temples;
  • Religious or civil ceremonies or observances, such as funerals and weddings; and
  • During public demonstration, such as a march, rally, or parade.

So, just almost any illegal alien can escape arrest by either walking with a second person (a march), attending some type of class, or finding a nearby church, medical facility or school bus stop.

“The enforcement actions covered by this policy are (1) arrests; (2) interviews; (3) searches; and (4) for the purposes of immigration enforcement only, surveillance,” the ICE policy says.

Each “FAQ” answer is accompanied by a translation for Spanish-speaking illegal aliens – but, not in any other foreign language.

The CBP website also provides a toll-free number and email address to enable illegal aliens report immigration enforcement efforts taking place at any of the “sensitive locations.”

RELATED ARTICLE: NATO Commander STUNS Media… Vindicates Trump With 1 Sentence

Kerry: Air conditioners as big a threat as the Islamic State

Stop laughing. Kerry is right. Watch for the next mass shooting by your air conditioner. Remember all those manifestos your air conditioner issued, vowing the imminent destruction of the U.S.

EDITORS NOTE: While you read the article below you may want to listen to Stealers Wheel singing Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right Stuck in the Middle with You:

JOHN KERRY-STATE DEPARTMENT-AP-JOHN DHARAPAK_0

“Kerry: Air Conditioners as Big a Threat as ISIS,” by Alyssa Canobbio, Washington Free Beacon, July 22, 2016:

Secretary of State John Kerry said in Vienna on Friday that air conditioners and refrigerators are as big of a threat to life as the threat of terrorism posed by groups like the Islamic State.

The Washington Examiner reported that Kerry was in Vienna to amend the 1987 Montreal Protocol that would phase out hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, from basic household and commercial appliances like air conditioners, refrigerators, and inhalers.

“As we were working together on the challenge of [ISIS] and terrorism,” Kerry said. “It’s hard for some people to grasp it, but what we–you–are doing here right now is of equal importance because it has the ability to literally save life on the planet itself.”

Kerry said that most of the substances banned in the Montreal Protocol have increased the use of HFCs and claimed that the coolant was thousands of times more potent than CO2. He added that the increase of HFCs has lead to the trend of global climate change.

“The use of hydrofluorocarbons is unfortunately growing,” Kerry said. “Already, the HFCs use in refrigerators, air conditioners, and other items are emitting an entire gigaton of carbon dioxide-equivalent pollution into the atmosphere annually. Now, if that sounds like a lot, my friends, it’s because it is. It’s the equivalent to emissions from nearly 300 coal-fired power plants every single year.”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

The Islamic Grievance-Monger Who Has Visited the Obama White House Seven Times

Britain’s first Muslim mayor is kicked out after being found guilty of blackmailing voters

Germany: Muslim bomber carried powerful explosives, authorities say no evidence of “extremism”

Germany: At least 1 dead, 11 injured in suicide bombing at wine bar

Munich jihad murderer was 18-year-old Iranian Muslim

CNN: Eyewitness at Munich mall says shooter screamed “Allahu Akbar”

Russian Cartoons On Obama’s Legacy

The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) published Russian Cartoons addressing President Obama’s legacy.

The following are cartoons published in pro-Kremlin media outlets on U.S. President Barack Obama’s legacy and future after the U.S. elections. The cartoons envision Obama inter alia working as a waiter at McDonald’s and as a pizza delivery, once his term of office as U.S. president expires.

Obama’s Future After The U.S. Elections


Twitter.com/13studiya, March 5, 2016.

Caption: What will Obama work at after he retires from office?

Choice No. 1: A waiter at McDonald’s

Choice No.2: A gangster

Choice No.3: A poker player

Choice No.4: A farmer


Twitter.com/13studiya, March 7, 2016.

November 2016. Obama: “I’ll be back”

January 2017. Obama delivering a pizza to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry: “I told you that I’ll be back!”


Twitter.com/13studiya, April 13, 2016.

Obama has been committed to a mental asylum, where he sees Russian matryoshka dolls popping up all around him.

Obama: “They just keep on coming!”

Obama Leaves Only Lies And Destruction Behind Him


Twitter.com/13studiya, February 27, 2016. 

The UN is shown chained to a dog house, representing the U.S. Obama is portrayed as blood-thirsty animal, responsible for wars in Syria, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan. The world looks at Obama in trepidation.


Twitter.com/13studiya, February 28, 2016.

Kerry: “Mr. President, what are you doing?

Obama: “I’m thinking.”

Caption: The Hague tribunal in the near future

Kerry: “You needed to think beforehand…”


Vitaly, Vk.com/13studiya, April 8, 2016.

 Obama bashing the dove of peace:”I take off my [Nobel Peace Prize] medal only to hit you with it!”


Vk.com/13studiya, May 29, 2016.

Pinocchio: “I’m human!!!”

Obama: “No, I’m human!!!”

Obama Lives In His Own World


Vitaly, Vk.com/13studiya, May 3.

Obama in the role of scarecrow: “This is my garden and I make the rules here”

Immigration and the Terrorist Threat: How our leaders are spawning catastrophe

The most recent horrific terror attack, this time in Nice, France on Bastille Day, is the latest of a string of attacks overseas as well as inside the United States.  It has shaken people around the world, causing them to question what their governments need to do to protect them.

Our leaders are forever reacting to the latest attack, placing us on an elevated defensive posture, whenever and wherever it may occur.  Often news reports are aired that show video clips of heavily armed police officers patrolling our airports and other venues in response to the latest attack no matter where the attack was carried out, to create the illusion of protecting us.

This perspective can most generously be called folly.  The terror threats we face do not go up and down like the stock market.  While it makes sense to marshal snow plow drivers and those that drive the trucks that spread salt on highways when a blizzard is forecast for the region, in preparation for the impending storm to quickly clear the roads, terrorism presents a constant threat.

The only questions are how, when, where, and how many will be killed or injured.  We are in this battle for the long haul and failure is not only not an option but would spell the catastrophic demise of our nation.

While some have simplistically said that our military alone, combating ISIS overseas can protect, the reality is that we must fight this war on two fronts- overseas and within our borders.  Domestically this battle must be waged by many elements of the law enforcement apparatus- including, especially, immigration law enforcement authorities.

This was my focus in my recent article, “Fighting The War On Terror Here, There and Everywhere.”

The 9/11 Commission was created to determine how terrorists were able to carry out deadly attacks in the United States to make certain that it would never happen again.  This is comparable to the way that the NTSB and the FAA investigate plane crashes to make the appropriate fixes.

The preface of the official report, “9/11 and  Terrorist TravelStaff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States” begins with this paragraph:

“It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.”

That report was a companion document to the The 9/11 Commission Report which also discussed how failures of border security and the lack of routine immigration law enforcement, including the identification of immigration fraud and visa fraud, enabled terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves in communities throughout the United States.

However, at the behest of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Visa Waiver Program which should have been terminated on September 12, 2001, has been continually expanded.  On September 11, 2001 26 countries participated in this program.  Today their are 38 member countries even though, as I wrote in a recent article, GAO Revelations: Our Open Door For TerroristsThe deadly failures of the visa waiver program, more than one-third of these countries fail to provide us with vital information about terrorists.

It should be clear that our borders and our immigration laws are our first and last lines of defense against international terrorists entering our country- yet our borders have become little more than speed bumps to those who smuggle drugs and illegal aliens.

The massive quantity of heroin and other illegal and dangerous drugs that pour across our borders 24/7 show how porous our borders are.  Those drugs are not only smuggled across the U.S./Mexican border but across our northern border and along our 95,000 miles of coastline and through our international aiports located in states across our nation.

Page 61 contained this passage:

Exploring the Link between Human Smugglers and Terrorists

In July 2001, the CIA warned of a possible link between human smugglers and terrorist groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad.149   Indeed, there is evidence to suggest that since 1999 human smugglers have facilitated the travel of terrorists associated with more than a dozen extremist groups.150  With their global reach and connections to fraudulent document vendors and corrupt government officials, human smugglers clearly have the “credentials” necessary to aid terrorist travel.

Furthermore most of the terrorists who have thus far been identified, including the 9/11 hijackers, were admitted into the United States through ports of entry.  Some terrorists succeeded in being granted political asylum, lawful immigrant status and even, in several cases, United States citizenship before they carried out terror attacks.

Meanwhile the administration continues to admit thousands of refugees from Syria even though they cannot be screened, an issue made abundantly clear by sworn testimony of James Comey, the Director of the FBI and other high-ranking officials, as I noted in my article, “Syrian ‘Refugees’ and Immigration Roulette .”

Politicians from both the Democratic and Republican parties have insisted that since we cannot deport 11 million illegal aliens- the number they frequently cite, we should simply give them lawful status and somehow this would magically enable us to identify who they are.  They also claim that this would get these heretofore illegal aliens “out of the shadows.”

The only question this raises is are these proponents for such a massive legalization program ignorant or are they so driven to placate their super-wealthy campaign contributors that they are willing to lead our nation down the path to our own destruction?

Here is what you need to consider.  First of all, there are likely two or three times as many illegal aliens as they claim- this means at the very least 30 million illegal aliens would participate in any such massive program.

With numbers that humongous, there would be no way to conduct any face-to-face interviews let alone any field investigations to determine if they provided false information in their applications.  This would include their true identities- including even their actual countries of citizenship, providing terrorists with the opportunity to game this process to acquire lawful status under false identities that would enable them to embed themselves in the United States and travel freely around the United States and even overseas where they could threaten our safety and the safety of our allies.

There would be absolutely no way to determine when they actually arrived in the United States.  Therefore it would be meaningless for politicians to establish a cutoff date of entry for aliens applying for amnesty.  Illegal aliens would simply claim to have been present in the United States prior to that date and there would be no way for our adjudications officer to deny their claims.

Additionally, terrorists and wanted criminals who know that they could be identified by their bio-metrics would simply continue to hide in the “shadows.”  There would be no resources to track them down and arrest them.  The amnesty program would require all of the resources (money and personnel) allocated to ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) and other immigration-related components of the DHS be devoted to the amnesty program.

If we are to truly harness the immigration system for the best interest of America and Americans we need to have a much larger number of ICE agents to enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.

What is generally not known by most Americans is that while the second largest contingent of law enforcement personnel assigned to the Joint Terrorism Task Force are ICE agents.  Most international terrorists commit immigration law violations including visa fraud and/or immigration benefit fraud.

Yet we have precious few agents assigned to ICE- no more than 7,000 for our entire country.  More than half of those agents are assigned to pursuing customs investigations that have nothing to do with immigration.  To put this number into perspective, the Border Patrol has well over 20,000 agents, there are more than 20,000 CBP (Customs and Border Protection) inspectors at our 325 ports of entry and roughly 45,000 employees at TSA.  The NYPD has more than 35,000 police officers to protect the City of New York.  We need to have many more ICE agents.

For roughly half of my 30 year career with the INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service), the agency that was sliced into several agencies when the DHS was created, I was assigned to the Drug Task Force and to DEA Intelligence.  I frequently assisted other law enforcement agencies including the FBI, DEA and many other federal as well as state and local police agencies in cultivating alien informants who were part of various ethnic immigrant communities who were eager to assist us.

As an INS agent, one of the biggest incentives I could offer to any illegal alien who was able to help us was to provide him/her with temporary employment authorization and, if the assistance was of particular importance and/or long term, we could provide such aliens with lawful immigrant status and even bring their family members to the United States.

In many instances, these informants were central to our ability to perfect criminal cases against major drug trafficking organizations and other such entities.  Such techniques could also be used to great advantage to pierce the veil of secrecy surrounding Middle Eastern communities involving aliens who may be involved in supporting and plotting terror attacks.

Illegal aliens who have no criminal histories should never be ignored. Most terrorists, like most spies, understand that to embed themselves they must keep an extrmely low profile to not call attention to themselves.  Consider what the 9/11 Commission Staff Report noted:

“Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.

On November 20, 2013 ABC News reported, “Exclusive: US May Have Let ‘Dozens’ of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees.  This is not a new problem, on July 13, 2011 the Washington Times published a truly disturbing article, Visas reviewed to find those who overstayed / Aim is to find any would-be terrorists.”

Consider that on September 2, 2014 ABC News reported, “Lost in America: Visa Program Struggles to “Track Missing Foreign Students.”

Here is how this report began:

The Department of Homeland Security has lost track of more than 6,000 foreign nationals who entered the United States on student visas, overstayed their welcome, and essentially vanished — exploiting a security gap that was supposed to be fixed after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks.

“My greatest concern is that they could be doing anything,” said Peter Edge, the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official who oversees investigations into visa violators. “Some of them could be here to do us harm.”

Homeland Security officials disclosed the breadth of the student visa problem in response to ABC News questions submitted as part of an investigation into persistent complaints about the nation’s entry program for students.

ABC News found that immigration officials have struggled to keep track of the rapidly increasing numbers of foreign students coming to the U.S. — now in excess of one million each year. The immigration agency’s own figures show that 58,000 students overstayed their visas in the past year. Of those, 6,000 were referred to agents for follow-up because they were determined to be of heightened concern.

“They just disappear,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. “They get the visas and they disappear.”

Coburn said since the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, 26 student visa holders have been arrested in the U.S. on terror-related charges.

The failures of the administration to enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States hobbles our efforts to protect America and Americans.

Indeed, page 54 of The 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel contained this excerpt under the title “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot.”

Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.

In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.

Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.

The threats America and Americans face are real.  Our government and our leaders must finally take the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 commission seriously.  Our very survival hangs in the balance.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Trump Does The Unthinkable

‘Bribery and Kickback Schemes’ Plague Syrian Relief Program Funded With Tax Dollars

Number of Islamist Terror Plots Against the US Rises to 89: Proactive Approach to Terrorism Needed

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in Front Page Magazine.

Federal Government Authorizes Facebook, Twitter, YouTube to Censor ‘Anti-Islam’ Speech

The censorship and discrimination against voices of freedom, along with consistent failure to act against jihad advocates and recruiters, on increasingly important social media platforms has gone on long enough. We’re suing. Pamela Geller weighs in here. AFDI press release here.

“Federal Government Authorizes Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to Censor ‘Anti-Islam’ Speech; Lawsuit Filed,” American Freedom Law Center, July 13, 2016:

Today, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a federal lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) under the First Amendment.

Section 230 provides immunity from lawsuits to Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, thereby permitting these social media giants to engage in government-sanctioned censorship and discriminatory business practices free from legal challenge.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer, and Jihad Watch.

As alleged in the lawsuit, Geller and Spencer, along with the organizations they run, are often subject to censorship and discrimination by Facebook, Twitter and YouTube because of Geller’s and Spencer’s beliefs and views, which Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube consider expression that is offensive to Muslims.

Such discrimination, which is largely religion-based in that these California businesses are favoring adherents of Islam over those who are not, is prohibited in many states, but particularly in California by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which is broadly construed to prohibit all forms of discrimination.  However, because of the immunity granted by the federal government, Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are free to engage in their otherwise unlawful, discriminatory practices.

As set forth in the lawsuit, Section 230 of the CDA immunizes businesses such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube from civil liability for any action taken to “restrict access to or availability of material that” that they “consider[] to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected.”

Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, issued the following statement:

“Section 230 of the CDA confers broad powers of censorship upon Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube officials, who can silence constitutionally protected speech and engage in discriminatory business practices with impunity by virtue of this power conferred by the federal government in violation of the First Amendment.”

Muise went on to explain:

“Section 230 is a federal statute that alters the legal relations between our clients and Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, resulting in the withdrawal from our clients of legal protections against private acts.  Consequently, per U.S. Supreme Court precedent, state action lies in our clients’ challenge under the First Amendment.”

David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, added:

“Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have notoriously censored speech that they deem critical of Islam, thereby effectively enforcing blasphemy laws here in the United States with the assistance of the federal government.”

Yerushalmi concluded:

“It has been the top agenda item of Islamic supremacists to impose such standards on the West.  Its leading proponents are the Muslim Brotherhood’s network of Islamist activist groups in the West and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), which co-sponsored, with support from Obama and then-Secretary of State Clinton, a U.N. resolution which called on all nations to ban speech that could promote mere hostility to Islam.  Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube are falling in line, and we seek to stop this assault on our First Amendment freedoms.”

AFLC Co-Founders and Senior Counsel Robert J. Muise and David Yerushalmi, along with the plaintiffs in this case, Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, will hold a Press Call from 2:00-2:30 p.m. on Wednesday, July 13.  To access this press conference call, dial (641) 715-3655 and enter code 111815.

RELATED ARTICLES:

YouTube CRACKS DOWN on Diamond and Silk – Demonetizes 95% of Their Videos ‘For Supporting Trump’

Audio: Robert Spencer on Kevin McCullough Live on Black Lives Matter, the global jihad, and the Iran threat

Robert Spencer in PJ Media: Why Iran Might WANT To Get Nuked After Nuking Israel

Obama whistleblower: Terror-linked Muslim groups helping set policy, costing lives

Malfeasance on a grand scale. I detailed in my 2013 book Arab Winter Comes to America how the Fort Hood and Boston Marathon jihad massacres could have been prevented, were it not for politically correct willful ignorance at the highest levels. And now Philip Haney is revealing that the situation is even worse than was previously known.

obama-fbi

“Obama Whistleblower: Terror-Linked Muslim Groups Helping Set Policy, Costing Lives,” by Philip B. Haney, Breitbart, July 6, 2016:

Last week I testified before the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Oversight, Agency Action, Federal Rights and Federal Courts at a hearing entitled, “Willful Blindness: Consequences of Agency Efforts To Deemphasize Radical Islam in Combating Terrorism.”

I am a recently retired Customs & Border Protection (CBP) agent. I was named a Founding Member of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) at its inception on March 01, 2003. During my 12 years serving inside DHS under two administrations, I witnessed a series of events which ultimately prompted me to become a whistleblower, releasing critical documents to Members of Congress as I felt necessary to comply with my oath to the Constitution.

First, in January of 2008, I received what is now known as the “Words Matter Memo,” which was circulated internally by the Civil Rights and Civil Liberties (CRCL) division of DHS. The full title of the document was “Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims,” and it read in part:

 [T]he experts counseled caution in using terms such as, “jihadist,” “Islamic terrorist,” “Islamist,” and “holy warrior” as grandiose descriptions.

Collapsing all terrorist organizations into a single enemy feeds the narrative that al-Qaeda represents Muslims worldwide.

We should not concede the terrorists’ claim that they are legitimate adherents of Islam. Therefore, when using the word [Islamic], it may be strategic to emphasize that many so-called “Islamic” terrorist groups twist and exploit the tenets of Islam to justify violence and to serve their own selfish political aims.

Regarding jihad, even if it is accurate to reference the term (putting aside polemics on its true nature), it may not be strategic because it glamorizes terrorism, imbues terrorists with religious authority they do not have, and damages relations with Muslims around the globe.

I submitted a seven-point response listing serious substantive concerns about this memo, but received no response.

On November 24, 2008, a decision came down in the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) trial, the largest terror financing case in American history. During that trial, the federal government had established that a number of organizations were appropriately named as unindicted co-conspirators along with HLF, including the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).

Specifically, the judge ruled that federal prosecutors had “produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, ISNA and NAIT with HLF… and with Hamas.” In addition, the judge ruled that that these organizations had direct links to the Muslim Brotherhood, one of the oldest and largest Islamic fundamentalist organizations in the world, founded in 1928 in Egypt to reestablish the Caliphate, whose motto includes“Jihad is our way, and death in the service of Allah is the loftiest of our wishes.”

I made note of the decision, and explored links between these groups and potential extremist and terrorist activity. But on October 15, 2009, I was ordered by DHS to ‘modify’ linking information in about 820 subject records in the Treasury Enforcement Communications System, or “TECS records” to remove ‘unauthorized references to terrorism.’ I was further ordered not to input any more Memoranda of Information Received, or MOIRs, to create no more TECS records, and to do no further research on the topics I was exploring.

On November 5, 2009, at Ft. Hood, Texas, Nidal Hasan shot and killed 13 people, including one who was pregnant, and wounded 32 others, while calling out “Allahu Akbar!” meaning “God is great” in Arabic.

Hassan was a U.S. Army major who had exchanged emails with leading al Qaeda figure Anwar Awlaki – which the FBI had seen and decided not to take action – in which he asked whether those attacking fellow U.S. soldiers were martyrs. He had also given a presentation to Army doctors discussing Islam and suicide bombers during which he argued Muslims should be allowed to leave the armed forces as conscientious objectors to avoid “adverse events.” The Pentagon refused for five years to grant victims Purple Hearts, designating the attack “workplace violence.”

On January 27-28, 2010 an ‘Inaugural Meeting’ occurred between American Muslim leaders and DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano, hosted by DHS CRCL. The Inaugural Meeting created controversy because it included a number of Islamic fundamentalist individuals and organizations.

For instance, the meeting included at least one organization that was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the 2008 HLF Trial and established to have associations with the now-shuttered HLF and with Hamas, namely ISNA. According to the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), the group’s representative who attended the meeting, Ingrid Mattson, has “an established pattern of minimizing the nature of extremist forms of Islam and rationalizing the actions of Islamist terrorist movements.” Another invited group, the Muslim American Society (MAS), was actually formed as the United States chapter of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1993.

Likewise, in the Spring of 2010, the Administration convened the Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Working Group under the authority of the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC), again raising questions because of those named to it.

They included Omar Alomari, who once wrote that jihad was “the benign pursuit of personal betterment. It may be applied to physical conflict for Muslims, but only in the arena of Muslims defending themselves when attacked or when attempting to overthrow oppression and occupation,” asserting further that “”Jihad as a holy war is a European invention, spread in the West”; Mohamed Elibiary, who has asserted that it was “inevitable that [the] ‘Caliphate’ returns” and ultimately was let go from the HSAC amid charges he misused classified documents; and Dahlia Mogahed, who has decried“lethal cocktail of liberty and capitalism” and holds that “Islamic terrorism’ is really a contradiction in terms” to mainstream Muslims “because terrorism is not Islamic by definition.”

So by the Spring of 2010, we had come to the point that a CBP Officer was literally removing information connecting the dots on individuals with ties to known terror-linked groups from TECS, while the Administration was bringing the same individuals into positions of influence, to help create and implement our counter-terror policy, in the context of actual terror attacks taking place.

On August 30, 2011, the DHS Chief Council approved a project I initiated looking into Islamic fundamentalist group Tablighi Jamaat (TJ). On November 15, 2011, I began a temporary duty assignment at the National Targeting Center (NTC). A short time later, I was assigned to the Advanced Targeting Team, where I worked exclusively on the TJ Project, which was quickly upgraded to a global-level case.

On March 15, 2012, seven lawyers and three senior executive service (SES) administrators met with management personnel at the NTC to express concern for our focus on TJ, because it is not a designated terrorist group, and therefore the project might be “discriminating” against its members because they are Muslim. On June-July, 2012, the TJ Initiative was ‘taken in another direction,’ (i.e. shut down). The Administration took this action despite the fact that [1] in nine months, we had conducted 1,200 law enforcement actions, [2] I was formally commended for finding 300 individuals with possible connections to terrorism, and [3] 25% of the individuals in Guantanamo Bay had known links to Tablighi Jamaat.

On August 22, 2012, The Institute of Islamic Education (IIE) case that today links both the Darul Uloom Al-Islamiya mosque attended by Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik, the San Bernardino shooters, and the Fort Pierce mosque attended by Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter, was entered into TECS. But once again, on September 21, 2012, all 67 records in the IIE case were completely deleted (not just ‘modified’) from TECS.

On September 21, 2014, I was relieved of my service weapon, all access to TECS and other programs was suspended, my Secret Clearance was revoked, and I was sequestered for the last 11 months of my career with no assigned duties.

On December 2, 2015, the San Bernardino shootings occurred, and I immediately linked the mosque in San Bernardino to the IIE case (with the 67 deleted records), and to the Tablighi Jamaat case (which was shut down).

On June 09, 2016, the Homeland Security Advisory Council Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Subcommittee issued an Interim Report and Recommendations. The report recommended in part using American English instead of religious, legal and cultural terms like “jihad,” “sharia,” “takfir” or “umma.”

On June 12, 2016, the shootings in Orlando occurred, and I linked Omar Mateen’s mosque in Fort Pierce, FL to the IIE & TJ case. And on June 19, 2016, Attorney General Loretta Lynch announced that her Department of Justice would release redacted 9-11 call transcripts for Mr. Mateen.

The threat of Islamic terrorism does not just come from a network of armed organizations such as Hamas and ISIS, who are operating ‘over there’ in the Middle East. In fact, branches of the same global network have been established here in America, and they are operating in plain sight, at least to those of us who have been charged with the duty of protecting our country from threats, both foreign and domestic….

RELATED ARTICLES:

Robert Spencer: Muslims wouldn’t bomb Muhammad’s city, would they? Sure they would.

T&T President: Quran “not a handbook of violence but a repository of peace, harmony and reformative knowledge”<