Displaying posts categorized under

HOMELAND SECURITY

Imams in the U.S and Canada: Which Should be Backed? by A. Z. Mohamed

While freedom of speech is permissible in the U.S., for centuries, hateful and violent rhetoric targeting Jews has been invariable in the religious and political discourse of Muslims, and is now as common in US and Canadian mosques, as in the Middle East.

While many Muslims seem never to tire of complaining about “Islamophobia” against their communities, they seem to have no problem disseminating hate speech — and sometimes hate acts — against other groups.

Statistics show that blacks, gays and Jews are far more disproportionately targeted for hate crimes in both the U.S. and Canada than Muslims are. When did anyone in North America last hear of ministers in churches or rabbis in synagogues calling for the death of Muslims?

Progressive Muslims and their imams should be promoted, consulted, and celebrated.

Since U.S. President Donald Trump recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel on December 6, 2017, at least three U.S. imams have called for the death of Jews — not Israelis: Jews — in Friday sermons at mosques across the U.S., which treasures freedom of speech, no matter how distasteful — unless it is “directed at inciting or producing imminent lawless action” or “likely to incite or produce such action.”

In Canada, however, there is no freedom of speech — meaning that “hate speech” is regarded as a crime that can be prosecuted. A few years ago, imams who did call for death of Jews in Canada resulted in some of these imams being investigated or prosecuted.

It is important to know what is being said, and by whom.

On Friday, December 8, 2017, for example, a sermon delivered in a Raleigh, North Carolina mosque, a U.S.-based Syrian imam, Abdullah Khadra, cited an anti-Jewish hadith (saying or act of Muhammad) that says, “By the end of time,” Muslims will exterminate all Jews. The sermon was recorded and transcribed by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI).

Jihadis and Drug Cartel at Our Border A nightmare on the horizon. Michael Cutler

The border that is supposed to separate the United States from Mexico must be made secure.

There is no shortage of compelling reasons why this must happen, and the sooner the better, but today, given the lunacy of Sanctuary Cities and Sanctuary States and the globalist goals of politicians from both political parties, particularly the Democratic Party leadership, rational and reasonable thought processes have been supplanted by greed, corruption and cowardice- fear of upsetting party leaders or fear of alienating deep-pocketed campaign contributors.

Indeed, it is irrational for any leader in the United States to refuse to take whatever measures must be taken to protect America and Americans from the rampant violence, corruption and potential for terrorists to traverse that highly porous border into the United States.

Yet this is precisely the situation that exists today in the United States.

Therefore, today we will consider some of the more compelling facts that demand that, for once and for all, the U.S./Mexican border be secured.

First of all, given the unstable and volatile situation in the Middle East, particularly Syria and U.S.-led military strikes in Syria, undoubtedly Iran and radical Islamists would like to be able to carry out terror attacks within the borders of the United States.

Iran and radical Islamists have a significant presence in Latin America, therefore, all that separates them from us is the U.S./Mexican border.

On April 21, 2017 I wrote an article, Border Security Is National Security in which I referenced an April 12, 2017 Washington Times report, Sharafat Ali Khan smuggled terrorist-linked immigrants.

Haley: Russian Nerve Agent in UK Harbinger of ‘Frightening New Reality’ By Bridget Johnson

UN Ambassador Nikki Haley warned at a UN Security Council briefing on the nerve agent attack in the UK that “we are rapidly confronting a frightening new reality — if chemical weapons can appear in a small English town, where might they start appearing next?”

The Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) Report on the Attack in Salisbury confirmed the British conclusion that the “high purity” nerve agent used in the attack was Russian Novichok. The UK says it was delivered in liquid form; one of the highest concentrations investigators has found was on Sergei Skripal’s front door handle.

Skripal, a former Russian spy who fed intelligence to the Brits from 1995 to 2004 and was sent to the UK in a spy exchange in 2010, and his daughter Yulia collapsed March 4 at a shopping center in Salisbury. The first police officer on scene, Nick Bailey, was hospitalized in serious condition and later released. A restaurant and a pub in the center tested positive for traces of the nerve agent.

“Last week, the Council met five times to discuss the chemical weapons attack in Douma. Today, we are here yet again talking about chemical weapons. This time, it’s about a military grade nerve agent used against two people on British soil. In the constant push of meeting after meeting here in this chamber, it’s easy to lose track of what this means,” Haley said at the UNSC meeting.

Facebook Bans Frontpage Editor Jamie Glazov For Reporting a Muslim’s Threat Threatening to break a kafir’s mouth is ok; it’s the kafir’s reporting of the threat that makes the community unsafe.

Facebook has banned Frontpage Editor and Glazov Gang host Jamie Glazov for seven days. Jamie’s crime is posting/reporting on his Facebook page a physical threat that was made to him personally on his FB page by a member of the Religion of Peace.

On Saturday, April 14, 2018, a certain Muhammad Irfan Ayoub started commenting on Jamie’s page, rebuking him for daring to bring attention to the persecution of women and girls under Sharia and telling Jamie to convert to Islam. As the exchange ensued over various aspects of Islam, and as Jamie made clear he did not want to convert, Ayoub made it evident that there would be punishment and that “Allah will defeat you.” Jamie inquired how this punishment from Allah was synonymous with Islam being a Religion of Peace — which Ayoub contested Islam to be. Ayoub explained that there is only peace for those who obey Allah and his prophet, but for those who do not, there will be no peace:

This “dialogue” continued and then Ayoub made it clear that he would start Allah’s punishment ahead of time and break Jamie’s mouth:

Threats to Power Grid Demand More Vigorous Response By J. Michael Barrett

Security, industry and government officials are increasingly warning that the U.S. electrical power grid faces potential widespread failure from broad-based, systemic threats such as a cyberattack or massive electromagnetic pulse (EMP) disturbance. Indeed, nations as varied as North Korea, Iran, China and Russia have hacked into the U.S power grid. As for EMPs, a senior Department of Homeland Security (DHS) official recently testified before Congress, “EMP can cause widespread disruption and serious damage to electronic devices and networks, including those upon which many critical infrastructures rely.” These so-called “grid-down” risks have yet to be met with the urgency they demand, but time is not on our side.

On the one hand, following growing awareness of the system’s vulnerability to such threats, Duke Energy recently added EMP threats to its emergency plans. Even Congress has gotten engaged by passing EMP-related provisions in the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act which, among other actions, directs DHS to include various grid-down scenarios into its planning and exercises.

Yet there has been little progress beyond studies and assessments, many of which conclude that we need more studies and assessments. This is happening even as the potential of conflict this year with Iran and North Korea seems worrisomely high.

If so many authorities agree grid-down cyber and EMP threats are real, why isn’t more being done? The answer, regrettably, lies hidden somewhere in the conflicting roles and responsibilities held by multiple federal, state and local public-sector stakeholders and the thousands of private sector firms that actually run the power grid.

Who sets the standards, who pays for the research, who implements the remedies, and who is liable if they don’t work? The answers, according to most people in each camp, always seems to be the same: “someone else.”

Terror Plot? There’s an App for That Encrypted messaging systems pose a real threat, and Western leaders need to engage their creators. By Steven Stalinsky

Right now Islamic State and its followers around the world are using mobile devices to choose targets, discuss methods and timing, and even raise funds. With the aid of encrypted messaging apps—most of which are developed by Western companies—these terrorists can communicate fully out of sight of intelligence and law-enforcement agencies. The murders of countless innocent people have been planned this way, and most Western leaders seem unsure about how to stop it.

Counterterrorism officials are overwhelmed by the sheer number of potential terrorists using these apps on mobile devices. They are further handicapped by their inability to access the encrypted information, which could help them stop attacks. In a January speech at the International Conference on Cyber Security, FBI Director Christopher Wray called the threat from terrorist use of encrypted apps “an urgent public safety issue.” He revealed that, as part of lawful investigations, the FBI had tried and failed to access encrypted information on nearly 8,000 devices in 2017. Appealing to the technology sector for help, Mr. Wray said: “I’m open to all kinds of ideas, because I reject this notion that there could be such a place that no matter what kind of lawful authority you have, it’s utterly beyond reach to protect innocent citizens.”

In response, Sen. Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) wrote a highly critical letter. He called Mr. Wray’s speech “ill-informed” and damaging to America’s security, economy and freedom: “Building secure software is extremely difficult . . . and introducing vulnerabilities would likely create catastrophic unintended consequences that could debilitate software functionality and security entirely.”

Future Warfare: Protecting the Grid By Tim Connors

The First Gulf War put American technological advantage on display against an adversary with no means to respond. Media images released throughout the campaign paid tribute to smart bombs, long-range rockets, and vastly improved ground, air and sea-based systems. America’s technological abilities were awe-inspiring.

A quarter-century later, the United States continues to seek technological superiority. Laser weapons, artificial intelligence and unmanned systems—the very stuff of sci-fi movies—are within our grasp. Unfortunately, such advances do not provide the comfort level they previously did.

Unlike the hapless Iraqi Army circa 1991, today’s potential threats and adversaries have the means to respond. Gulf War-era technological advantages like night vision and GPS are becoming commonplace. Advances in computer and information technology enable adversaries to develop new tactics in cyberspace. And nation states have invested in weapon systems and strategies that offset American advantages.

Geography, another traditional American advantage, no longer acts as a protective security barrier. Terror cells and cyber warriors have already shown they can penetrate our borders and deliver devastating blows. The Homeland is no longer a safe haven to build might and project power. Our factories, military bases, and infrastructure will high priority targets in a future war.

ICNA Featuring Hamas Operative Monzer Taleb, in Texas This Weekend Taleb thinks masked Hamas terrorists are “superheroes.” Joe Kaufman

This weekend, the so-called charitable arm of the Islamic Circle of North America, ICNA Relief, a group that has been linked to the financing of Hamas, will be sponsoring an event in Texas featuring Hamas operative Monzer Taleb. The title of the event is ‘Changing COMMUNITIES with COMPASSION,’ but there can never be compassion with anything concerning Hamas, only hate, violence and bloodshed.

Monzer Mostafa Taleb (Talib) loves to sing about the Palestinian cause. He has been doing so for years. This includes singing about Hamas, specifically his involvement with Hamas.

During the US government’s prosecution of the Hamas charity Holy Land Foundation (HLF), the trials of which took place in 2007 and 2008, a video was submitted into evidence showing Taleb participating at an event sponsored by the Islamic Association for Palestine as the lead vocalist of a singing troupe called Al-Sakhra. On the video, Taleb sings, “O Jew, O coward… I am from Hamas and have never cheered for anyone else besides her… And she is the one which marches with the light of Muhammad… towards Jihad… And Hamas refuses peace with its enemies, and her slogan is to forever fight the attacker.”

The Islamic Association for Palestine or IAP was the American propaganda wing of Hamas and was founded in 1981 by future Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook and future Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) leader Sami al-Arian. Both IAP and HLF were member organizations of Marzook’s Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood US umbrella group, the Palestine Committee. [Taleb has also spoken in front of and cavorted with another Palestine Committee member organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).]

Trump Administration Unveils Plans to Send National Guard Troops, Build Base Walls Near U.S.-Mexico Border Homeland Security secretary says agency and Pentagon will be directed to work with governors on deployment

WASHINGTON—The White House said Wednesday it would deploy National Guard troops to the border with Mexico and would consider building a wall along at least one military base set on the border.

Administration officials also said they were hoping for a high-profile congressional debate this spring and summer over U.S. protections for children and migrants seeking asylum, saying these “loopholes” were encouraging illegal migration.

The goal of the debate appeared to be in part to create a greater political contrast with Democrats on the issue of immigration. If Democrats resist, a senior administration official said, the administration would work to tell voters that the opposition was “the party of open borders.”

Officials said their goal is to combat what they see as out-of-control illegal migration, though the number of unauthorized crossings is lower than it has been in decades, according to government statistics. Administration officials said there was an uptick in March and said they feared bigger increases this spring and summer.

Few details about the size, scope or timing of the National Guard deployment were available. Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said President Donald Trump would sign a proclamation ordering the Department of Homeland Security and the Pentagon to work with border-state governors to dispatch troops and that she hoped the deployment would begin immediately.

“We are beginning today and we are moving quickly,” she said. “The threat is real.”

Details, she said, would need to be worked out with the four border state governors, and she said she had spoken with each of them. State officials in Texas, Arizona and New Mexico expressed support for the administration’s latest initiatives on illegal immigration, but California has fought Trump immigration policies. CONTINUE AT SITE

Report: House Democrats Exempted Pakistani IT Aides from Background Checks By Mairead McArdle

Not one of 44 House Democrats bothered with background checks for members of a close-knit group of Pakistani IT aides who ended up gaining “unauthorized access” to congressional data, a new report from The Daily Caller shows.

House security rules require members to start a background check for employees, but they can also put down that another member has vouched for the person.

The background check was waived for all five IT workers, who made headlines last year for what the House inspector general’s report described as activity with “nefarious purposes.”

Pakistan-born Imran Awan, who served as a tech aide in Congress for 13 years, managed to snag congressional IT jobs with salaries as high as $165,000 for his brothers Abid and Jamal, his wife Hina Alvi, and his friend Rao Abbas, who had just been fired from McDonald’s. Together the group was found logging into accounts of representatives who had not hired them, using representatives’ private usernames, and uploading data off of the House network, according to the inspector general’s report.

Abid was working for Representative Yvette Clarke (D., N.Y.) when $120,000 of computer equipment disappeared. Then-congressman Xavier Becerra, who hired Imran, had his server stolen after the inspector general listed it as evidence in an investigation.

Some of the inspector general’s investigators who reviewed the aides’ network activity mused that they may have been ignoring House security protocol simply to share job duties, but others felt it was something more sinister.