The FBI clearly knew the attack on our free speech event was coming (although it didn’t bother to inform us or our security team), as this FBI agent was right there, following behind the jihadis, whom he had encouraged to “tear up Texas.” But even though they knew the attack was coming, they didn’t have a team in place to stop the jihadis. They had one man there, and one man only. The jihadis were not stopped by FBI agents, but by our own security team. If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others. (They would no doubt have loved to kill Geert Wilders, but he left before they arrived.)
It was revealed in August 2016 that this undercover FBI agent encouraged the jihadis: “Days before an ISIS sympathizer attacked a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, he received a text from an undercover FBI agent. ‘Tear up Texas,’ the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday.”
What was the FBI’s game in telling them to do that? Why didn’t they have a phalanx of agents in place, ready to stop the attack? Or did they want the attack to succeed, so that Barack Obama’s vow that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” would be vividly illustrated, and intimidate any other Americans who might be contemplating defending the freedom of speech into silence?
We twice asked the clueless and corrupt FBI for an investigation into this matter. They ignored us. Of course. After all, it isn’t as if this happened to someone important, like Linda Sarsour.
“Undercover FBI agent will testify in disguise to partially-closed courtroom in terror suspect’s trial,” by Eric Heisig, Cleveland.com, March 2, 2018 (thanks to the Geller Report):
CLEVELAND, Ohio — An undercover FBI agent will don a disguise and use a pseudonym in a partially-closed courtroom when testifying in a trial for a man charged with working to create a cell of Islamic State supporters to carry out violent acts in the United States.
The agent’s identity must be protected when he takes the stand against Erick Jamal Hendricks in a federal courtroom in Akron because he is still working cases undercover, federal prosecutors said. To show his face to the public would put his and his family’s safety at risk, as Hendricks and others have conducted countersurveillance to detect undercover law enforcement, the government argued.
U.S. District Judge John Adams agreed, imposing nearly all the safety measures requested by prosecutors for the agent’s testimony, which is expected take place sometime this month. Jury selection for Hendricks’ trial began Friday. The trial could last up to three weeks.
An order issued Wednesday says the agent will testify under a pseudonym, wear a “light disguise, such as changing … facial hair, hairstyle, or dress style” and is allowed to enter the courthouse through an entrance not available to the public.
Only the judge, jury, defendant, his attorneys, the government’s team and essential court staff will be allowed in the courtroom during the agent’s testimony, the judge ordered. Spectators can listen to an audio feed of the testimony in a separate room in the courthouse. They will not be able to see the agent.
Adams noted that he may allow Hendricks’ close family in the courtroom while the agent testifies.
Hendricks, 37, of North Carolina is charged with conspiring to provide support to ISIS. Federal prosecutors say his mission was to recruit and train ISIS sympathizers in the U.S. to carry out attacks. He vetted people to see if they were suitable to join his cell and told others to vet more possible recruits through social media, authorities say.
A large part of the government’s case centers on Hendrick’s alleged connection to one of two gunmen who opened fire at “The First Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest” in Garland, Texas in May 2015. Simpson and the other man, Nadir Hamid Soofi, wounded a security guard before police shot and killed them.
The undercover agent is expected to testify that he spoke to Hendricks through social media and that Hendricks connected Simpson and the agent. Hendricks also directed the agent travel to Garland, which is northeast of Dallas, because of the contest. Once there, Hendricks asked the undercover agent about security measures at the event, according to court records.
In addition to being in close to the exhibit around the time of the attack, the undercover agent was in communication with Simpson before Simpson and Soofi opened fire, filings show. An FBI affidavit filed in support of Hendricks’ arrest in August 2016 noted that the agent, while talking to Simpson, told him to “tear up Texas” more than a week prior to the Garland art exhibit shooting.
The agent made the comment “in an effort to continue their dialogue,” the affidavit says.
The measures the government requested and the judge allowed to restrict the public’s ability to watch the undercover agent testify are unusual but not unprecedented. While the Sixth Amendment guarantees a defendant’s right to a public trial, courts have taken unique steps in cases that involve law enforcement doing undercover work, especially in terrorism cases.
Judges across the country have approved measures similar to the ones Adams will impose or have taken other steps such as using a screen to shield an agent or informant’s face from a courtroom’s viewing gallery.
Hendricks’ attorneys disputed some, but not all of the measures the judge ordered to limit access to the undercover agent’s testimony….
Snake Eater says
Robert wrote “If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others. (They would no doubt have loved to kill Geert Wilders, but he left before they arrived.)”
My question is to you Robert and Pamela, why were you not exercising your Second Amendment rights to carry a firearm? Had the jihadis gotten through your team you and Pamela would have been armed and been able to put up a fight? It’s not like you don’t know that you and Pamela are prime jihadist targets.
PunJabber says
How do you know they weren’t carrying firearms? That is, well concealed (small) defensive weapons whose purpose is to “enable you to survive running away to get to your combat arms”? For a high-visibility target in a crowd, you expect your principals to “put up a fight” against armed and armored ambushers?
The job of spokesmen is to speak. The job of snake eaters is to eat snakes. Chow down!
Snake Eater says
You asked me how do I know they weren’t carrying firearms? Because I took at face value what Robert wrote himself in the article, that “If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others.” Nothing at all ambiguous about Robert’s statement…doesn’t sound like a statement from someone who was carrying firearms to me!
Let me play the devil’s advocate for a minute PunJabber and ask you what advice you would give to Robert, Pamela, and all the others in this situation assuming that the jihadis had gotten through Robert’s security team?
Naildriver says
The point is the FBI enabled rather than protected the assault upon them by individual who are Islamic and motivated by that system. Islam –and rather than investigate the failure the FBI persists in falsely claiming the agents actions had merit.
Obama’s was a traitor, but is this FBI collusion with the suspects in keeping with Obama”s wishes -‘ or even in answer to a dog whistle to him? At best it suggests the FBI is incompetent beyond words.
CRUSADER says
Thank you for driving that nail home on this matter.
VRWC member77 says
Carrying a concealed weapon is pointless if you don’t have the time, patience and consistency to practice using it, in order to maintain the required shooting skills to make it worth carrying such a weapon. Also, Robert’s a busy guy with a high profile. He lives in California -a state that is only second to DC as having the strictest gun laws in the country. California makes it nearly impossible for the average citizen to obtain a concealed carry permit.
Maybe Robert was armed and maybe he wasn’t. That still doesn’t change the consistency of his statement especially from an after-the-fact view point. He most likely would have been killed if he had to face off with the Islamic Terrorists and the heavy weaponry they possessed. Trump himself may carry a concealed weapon as a last ditch attempt to give himself just a little tiny bit of an edge. But that tiny bit of an edge isn’t going to mean much if someone wants to kill the president. I apply that same high profile situation to someone like Robert and Pamela.
Snake Eater says
Sounds like you are coming up with a lot of excuses and hypotheticals on behalf of Mr. Spencer and Ms. Geller as to why they should not take responsibility for defending themselves in a worse-case scenario.
Sounds like you are suggesting that they should just stand there and get slaughtered like lambs by the jihadis without attempting to defend themselves had the jihadis gotten through their security team? I sure hope that is not the position you are taking…so let me play the devil’s advocate VRWCmember77 and ask you what position are you taking? What advice you would give to them and all the others in a similar scenario, assuming that the jihadis had gotten through their security team?
VRWC member77 says
To Snake Eater:
I’m saying for all practical intensive purposes it wouldn’t have mattered if Robert was armed with a hand gun or not. If the Jihadis got through the security team, that would mean the security team wasn’t very good and it is HIGHLY LIKELY that Robert having a hand gun, wouldn’t have made any difference. “If this” and “what if” don’t matter a whole lot after the fact. Violent situations with guns transpire very quickly and no one can predict the outcome ESPECIALLY when YOU DON”T KNOW WHO THE PERPETRATORS WILL BE AND WHEN THEY WILL SHOW UP. Maybe Robert doesn’t like hand guns. Maybe he has an allergic reaction to certain gun metals. I don’t know. Why don’t you present a list “what if” scenarios to him? The idea that Robert having a handgun would have saved himself along with all the other attendees if the Security team failed is ludicrous.
I think Robert and Pamela handled the event the best way that they could and that the right people ended up dead…….that’s what I think and I have, and never claimed to have any after-the-fact “advice” for them.
Snake Eater says
Spoken like a true defeatist VRWCmember77…I’m glad that I don’t have to count on you to ever back me up!
VRWC member77 says
Snake eater:
As a result of your lacking coherence I will stay as far away from you as far as possible from the back or the front.
CRUSADER says
Thank you VRWC for your expression of REALISM in this matter.
Screeminmeeme says
Maybe they were armed. Maybe Mr Spencer was talking about a worse-case scenario. Don’t you agree that its wise to not let the enemy know what your defenses are?
Snake Eater says
To reiterate what I had written earlier in this thread, as a man of integrity and solid reputation, I took at face value what Mr. Spencer had written in his article, and I quote, “If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others.” Speak up if you disagree, but there is nothing at all ambiguous about his statement…doesn’t sound like he was personally armed to me!
But to get back to my main point, the second clause of our Second Amendment, “,the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Given the many death threats that have apparently been made against both Mr. Spencer and Ms. Geller over the years, the prudent thing to do would be to arm themselves and exercise their Second Amendment rights in order to defend not only themselves but others as well…just in case…as Mr. Spencer wrote, “the jihadis had gotten through our team.”
CRUSADER says
2nd Amendment is a fine thing, and it buttresses the 1st, for sure.
CRUSADER says
Let’s hope that RS and PG get plenty of range time.
It’s one thing to “carry”, and another thing to be very good with a perishable skill.
Having others to help secure, and to have Law Enforcement to their protective job is essential.
Naildriver says
What’s preposterous is the FBI and our government was not out in full force to protect Spencer and Geller, and all those others exercising their right of free speech.
At some point the government had better step up to protecting its citizens exercising their lawful rights, and not establishing a clear enemy to this country, an enemy on many levels; and even establishing a religion as is forbidden by our Constitution.
That enemy is Islam, and the government led by Obama has shamefully and openly acted to establish Islam. Participants in the government responsible will be rightly confronted by lawful militias and reap lawful open violence in defense of the Constitution — or will it? But that’s where the 2nd amendment kicks in. It is the responsibility of the government to uphold the Constitution.
But this premise that the responsibility to protect himself is that of Spencer is hog wash.
Snake Eater says
Naildriver wrote, “Participants in the government responsible will be rightly confronted by lawful militias and reap lawful open violence in defense of the Constitution — or will it? But that’s where the 2nd amendment kicks in.”
Where are these “lawful militias” of which you speak that are going to “rightly confront?”
I hate to break the news to you Naildriver, but the destruction of the Constitutional Militias of the several States (the first clause in the Second Amendment) began at the turn of the 20th century.
mortimer says
The FBI agent would have been a position to issue pictures of the suspects to the local police to be on the lookout.
The only possible justification one can find in this smelly affair is that PERHAPS the agent knew the JIHADIS would be gunned down and left them to their ‘EXECUTION’ by the armed security guards.
HOWEVER, the FBI agent put the LIVES of the security guards AT RISK… thus ENDANGERING the public he was sworn to protect… thus breaking his oath as an FBI agent.
It ends up BAD any way you look at it.
Phil Copson says
“….The FBI agent would have been a position to issue pictures of the suspects to the local police to be on the lookout.
The only possible justification one can find in this smelly affair is that PERHAPS the agent knew the JIHADIS would be gunned down and left them to their ‘EXECUTION’ by the armed security guards….”
——————-
As I recall the previous JW accounts – the FBI didn’t inform anybody at all – not the personal security and not even the local police. The agent cannot possibly have known that, in the event, the security on the pavement would be sufficiently vigilant, and be able to draw fast enough and fire accurately enough to halt the attack, so there is no excusing his (in)actions.
If these people – the agent/his bosses/local police chiefs etc – are all of the same stamp as Sheriff Israel in Broward County- rabid Clinton/Islam fans – then I would guess that there is little chance of getting the truth out of them. Like the proponents of a certain sect or Hillary Clinton herself, their sense of entitlement would be so strong that they believe that the truth is whatever they say it is.
They’ve had a very long time to work out and rehearse their story, so I hope they can come up with something more original than the standard “the-dog-ate-my-homework” excuse of “I was just about to send a warning through, when – hot-diggity, can you believe it ? – my radio broke down/my ‘phone battery went flat/I got a puncture/the bit of paper with the sheriff’s ‘phone number blew out the window/my grandma died etc.
As local police stopped the agent’s car, is it safe to assume that they weren’t told who to stop and who to let go ? Or did the local police chief and the FBI decide between them to do nothing and keep quiet, not reckoning on their men being smart enough to pull over a car that had been at the scene, but wasn’t being driven by anyone involved in the shooting ?
Either the agent went rogue, or somebody high-up in the FBI – who won’t be there giving evidence – was pulling his strings. And a Left-wing judge could shut down all promising lines of questioning anyway.
Fingers crossed that the truth comes out, but with Comey finessing it, what are the chances this won’t be another “Bengha-rland” ?
CRUSADER says
Clever what you did there amalgamating fear and dread of “Benghazi” coverup with what may happen over “Garland”. (Of course the H was and still is silent in BengHazi, as she and her ilk among the Obamanation Administration seemed complicit about it all and the fall.)
Comey gets to do a tell all, and make money (unlike what General Michael Flynn has been allowed to do so far….) Comey and Stephanopoloser interview : April 15th on ABC tv.
What a “show” that will be…
======================
Exclusive: James Comey to give first interview to ABC News’ George …
abcnews.go.com/Politics/exclusive-james-comey-give-interview-abc-news…/story?id…
James Comey gives his first interview with George Stephanopoulos. ABC News. James Comey gives his first interview with George Stephanopoulos. Comey’s controversial firing by the President last May was initially blamed on his handling of the FBI’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s private …
ABC’s Stephanopoulos to interview Comey in April | TheHill
thehill.com/homenews/…/374178-abcs-stephanopoulos-to-interview-comey-in-april
Former FBI Director James Comey will sit down for an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos ahead of the release of his highly anticipated book.
Joe says
The two security guards were surprised by the attack. One guard was injured. The other guard, who had a pistol, took out two men with semi-automatic rifles. That was not a likely outcome. The FBI planned a massacre. It is that simple.
Mac-101 says
I dislike law suits and LAUYERS, but in this case I recommend it to git some more truth out of the FBI! They are agents of the Globalist deep state and NO DOUBT wanted you two DEAD!
Timothy says
The politically correct FBI.
Ed Lee says
Robert, as you have pointed out many times, Muslim organizations have distributed fliers advising Muslims not to talk to, or cooperate with the FBI. Because of the FBI’s incompetence and malice, that is good advice for everyone, not just Muslims. You should heed it.
CRUSADER says
WHEN will be the “The FOURTH Annual Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest” ????
I’d like to sharpen my pencils and ready my ink wells….
and do a little coloring experiment, a la, Louder With Crowder:
====================================================
Painting Muhammad with Bob Ross | Louder With Crowder – YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PpE15yh58
http://louderwithcrowder.com
…
Bob Ross Paints Muhammad with Period Blood! | Louder With Crowder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAWv9Yo2c_o
Inspired by BuzzFeed’s recent ‘LadyLike’ video, Bob Ross teaches us the joy of painting Muhammad (PBUH …)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7PpE15yh58
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAWv9Yo2c_o
Indiana Tom says
Or did they want the attack to succeed, so that Barack Obama’s vow that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” would be vividly illustrated, and intimidate any other Americans who might be contemplating defending the freedom of speech into silence?
So the Caliphate In Chief is a Kenyan Muslim; So this question goes to Mister Obvious.
Indiana Tom says
But even though they knew the attack was coming, they didn’t have a team in place to stop the jihadis. They had one man there, and one man only. The jihadis were not stopped by FBI agents, but by our own security team.
Yeah, and Liberals wonder why some people support the 2A and the NRA. Remember, the government has no legal obligation to protect you.
Jack Holan says
I don’t know how much experience this Judge has had in Terrorist cases but I will say letting in close relatives during the testimony of the undercover Agent is not the best idea since Terrorists in the ME tend to work in cells of close relatives. Also, allowing Spectators to listen to the audio feed of the Agents testimony is as good as putting an ID on him if he’s working active cases and the cell sends someone to be a spectator to hear the voice of the Agent. Lastly and there is a fair chance that the Defense Team may have a Muslim Brotherhood Attorney on board.
BringBackTheCrusades says
Agreed, the agent in “light disguise” appears to be hiding his identity from Pamela and Robert not the terrorist.
CRUSADER says
I like your moniker.
Will need a more capable Pontiff, however, for this topic to turn to action.
+++++++++
DEUS VULT
+++++++++
Johnny Cuyana says
J. Edgar Hoover was the FBI “top dog” from 1924 to 1972, when, while he was still in that positioned, he died of a heart attack. This thoroughly disgusting man, who, by any definition which could be put forth by our Founders, was anything BUT a patriot; rather, by his actions and deeds, he was the worst of what the unelected and unaccountable DC Swamp could offer. Nonetheless, by President Nixon, Hoover was provided a State Funeral, part of which was to see his body “lie in State” at our DC Capitol Building; an honor given to less than a handful of all of our political figures.
Hoover, by a wide variety of accounts, appears to have been corrupted beyond thoroughly by his “absolute power”, where his FBI directorship, of near 50 years, was described as something of a reign of terror and hypocrisy, and, onto which he held with an iron fist. It is the opinion of many that Hoover and “his” FBI represented, in the form of a “Police Institution” — apparently, answerable to NO elected officials — the absolute worst of corruption and immorality offered by our federal government; the larger argument being which historical entity would be considered for second place in such a criminal and nationally embarrassing “contest”.
Of course, as its figurehead and by his direction, great effort was made by his propagandists to ensure that he was, at ALL times, presented in the best of possible ways … while, in reality, he was as crooked as they came: cozying up to all the major mob bosses of those times, while, at the taxpayers’ expense, living like absolute royalty. [I’m not sure that I would trust the likes of YouTube to present the “true” Hoover story; but, one could do worse. Better, however, IMO, to pick up one of several commended books regarding the biography of this totally disgusting, immoral human being.]
Infamously, Nixon, other Presidents and other high-up politicians and national figures of those days — e.g., see one Martin L. King — were “held in check”, to one great degree or another, by the corrupt Hoover, who, over his lengthy stay in power, had accumulated a legendary comprehensive library of personal dossiers. It was reported widely that such dossiers contained much scandalous material on each and every Wash DC and national power player. [To what degree this is true, no one can say for certain; where, it is interesting to note that after Hoover’s death, such files were never “located”. Hmmm … I cannot comment on this other than saying: IMO if Nixon and the other would have admitted to finding such files, more than likely, they would have been compelled by some portion of the citizenry to publicize what was in them. Yeah … right: we can all just see that happening. My question is: have these dossiers been ALL destroyed or hidden … for some future “use”?]
Upon his death, his second in command, Clyde Tolson, his in-real-life life-long “partner” — EVERY day they lunched and dined together, they vacationed and traveled together … ALWAYS — assumed command but only for ONE DAY … after which Nixon replaced him with L. Patrick Gray. [Note: Years before, Tolson had suffered a stroke and ever since was in rather poor physical health, but, Hoover, for reasons which reasonable people can surmise, kept him in that “second banana” position. It’s good to the king.] Gray was a real squish, but, most importantly, he was a “yes” man for Nixon; that is, at a time when Nixon really needed “yes” men.
Note: Mark Felt was “second banana” to Tolson, for that ONE day, but, when Felt, in favor of Gray, was passed over for the Director’s position he did resign and went on to his second clandestine career as “Deep Throat” of Watergate infamy. Note further: Gray was never made permanent director because he was not confirmed by the Senate. This rejection had something to do with — no, I’m not making this up — the fact that he destroyed illegally some Watergate-related documents. [I don’t remember whether Gray was prosecuted for same; but, I’m pretty sure that he did not do any “time”.]
So, Gray was gone after less than a year, and through the remaining Nixon, Ford and Carter years the director’s position was filled with “career” FBI bureaucrats; all of whom, most likely, were “groomed” by Hoover and his lapdog [Tolson]. I have always been in the camp which believed that Hoover had thoroughly corrupted the FBI and that that agency never got any measure of moral relief until President Carter put William Webster into the director’s seat. Webster had been a career federal judge — not, heretofore involved in any way with the corrupted FBI — and he remained in that position for a number of years — through most of the Reagan years — subsequently, if memory serves, he then went on to direct the CIA; establishing his to be, in contrast with the typical DC way of doing things, a unique CV.
From the above very brief outline — yes, it is just an outline of the “top dog” position, and, not a complete one, at that — the point is that the FBI, amongst what I assume to be many [all?] corrupt fed govt agencies, is, IMO, one of the MOST corrupt; where Webster was the FIRST Director who was NOT found in need to be ousted prematurely, for nefarious reasons, from his director’s position. Perhaps — and I need to do some research on this — he may have put forth some effort to clean out that quagmire; but, until his time, the entire FBI, based on its decidedly pathological leadership, apparently was not an agency “of the people”; actually, I suspect that it was mostly a “run-away” agency of arrogant, self-serving, career-driven, permanent state apparatchiks.
Jumping ahead, Herr Mueller was made Director by G.W. Bush and he remained at that post for about 13 years; which I remember, in general, because Obama, with Congressional approval, asked to him to stay beyond the 10-year limited term; from where, in 2013, he finally departed. [I don’t make much of the fact that almost NO FBI Directors, other than Hoover, stay there for the full 10 years because, in DC, with all the pressure, that is a long time for any one person to sit tight.] After Mueller came Comey — now, there’s another real winner — until, famously, he was fired by POTUS Trump. McCabe — who also now finds himself in some very hot water — as acting Director, filled the post for a few months and then the current Director, Christopher Wray was nominated and approved; where he has been there now for not quite a year.
Obama, which was his style — corrupt, command-and-control, Chicago gangland style — politically weaponized, even more so, every federal agency onto which he could lay his corrupted dirty mits; and, with Comey, I suspect he did so at the FBI with an anti-American ideological vengeance.
The overall point of my comment being — in view of Spencer’s article — that the FBI has been, and, in many ways, continues to be, used NOT as an instrument of enforcement of the law as We The People; but, rather, first and foremost, an instrument of corruption to secure and advance, through unaccountable “strongman” tactics, the craven desires of the past administrations; where, such has been their demonstrated disgusting “Modus Operandi” and culture.
So, to me, this situation, as Spencer describes with this one agent, is NO surprise whatsoever; where such similar behavior can be expected until the people demand that something is done about the entire rotten agency. I am not holding my breath.
Note: IMO, POTUS Trump is not engaging much in such behavior — at least not apparent to me that he continues to “weaponize” the agency … but, I will defer my final judgment — and, possibly, if and when the timing is good, I suspect that he will be doing something to rectify this mess — no small task — however, given the nature of his present “full plate”, such a political objective is a lower priority.
Yes, this is just largely my speculation; however, it is the way in which I read the tea leaves — the FBI and much of DC has been corrupt for a long, long time; it is SYSTEMIC and daunting and fiercely self-protecting — but, to all freedom-loving Americans, the fact that such is so … is colossally embarrassing.
CRUSADER says
“…..who, by any definition which could be put forth by our Founders….”
What do you mean by this sentence?
CRUSADER says
Frankly, it seems that Obama was more of a useful instrument of the LEFT. He had enough tendencies toward “fairness” that the purveyors of Socialism took over his mind.
He seems less corrupt but more susceptible to influence, from being one of those people who want to do the right thing for everybody, and ends up being used….unwittingly.
Those he was surrounded with seem more the ambitious and corrupt type, who influenced his direction down a road more and more to their liking. Definitely, more of a dhimmi than a dummy, Obama drank the KOOL-AID of the Left, while thinking it was more Liberal-minded policies on the correct side of history. Obama is interested in his legacy being connected to those he admires, such as MLK Jr, about who he spoke with regard to how history arcs….toward liberty (but that is a name Leftists use to confuse….when it is really about globalist, socialist, liberal politics).
Georg says
That the FBI didn’t have a small army waiting to intervene before they got to the contest is chilling. Wonder if that’s more a function of the Obama Admin. or the FBI in general. Aside from being horrifying it is deeply unnerving.
Savvy Kafir says
Agreed. It is horrifying & unnerving to think that the American government, including law enforcement officials, has become THAT corrupt & dishonorable.
But the Founding Fathers knew that governments have a tendency to run amok and begin working against the interests of their citizens — which is (primarily) why the Second Amendment exists; so the government doesn’t control all of the firepower, in case it gets too corrupt or uppity.
Snake Eater says
Yes, the Second Amendment is the necessary keystone of our Constitution. Too bad that our Second Amendment exists only in part, the first 13 words (the first clause of the Second Amendment) was essentially destroyed back at the turn of the 20th century by an unconstitutional arrangement between Congress and the several States. Since that time, all that remains of our Second Amendment is the second clause…and even that continues to be infringed upon by the anti-gun movement.
CRUSADER says
Wait for the social civil war to erupt.
MFritz says
Still too much “Obama” in the FBI…
Investigate Gov Corruption NOW says
This is heinousness. Together with the lawsuit against the FBI, no other conclusion is possible. Imagine if the FBI had the same information on 9/11 and didn’t act.
AP says
Where is common sense and the rule of law. The people in charge of this investigation should be singled out and fired.
FYI says
Erick knows about his prophet,right?
Probably not.
Sahih Muslim 3901
Muhammed the seller of Black people into slavery…and it was 2 black people for the price of one non-black slave…..
Joe says
The agent does not need to have his identity protected. He needs to be in jail waiting trial for conspiracy to terror and mass murder.
CRUSADER says
Law Enforcement is having challenges and infiltrations everywhere, it seems.
LEOs need to be put through the ringer and filter out whose ideology fits their capacities and duties.
For instance, UtT reports this:
—————
Police Continue to Follow Normative Practices & Work with Jihadis
A lot of information has been revealed about Broward County Sheriff Israel in Florida in recent weeks. Most noteworthy is the fact he hired, supported, and defends Hamas leader Nezar Hamze. Hamze served as the Executive Director of Hamas doing business as CAIR-Florida, and currently serves as CAIR-Florida’s second in command. Hamze is also a Deputy with Broward County Sheriff’s Office.
In light of this, UTT believes it is important to bring to light a few anecdotal red-flags inside local law enforcement highlighting the utter lack of understanding local police have of the jihadi threat.
To be fair, many state and local police agencies and sheriff’s departments assume the FBI is actually doing it’s job and adequately informing them of “terrorism” matters. These assumptions are incorrect.
In January 2016, Duke University’s Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security
Sanford School of Public Policy produced a report sponsored by the Department of Justice entitled “The Challenge and Promise of Using Community Policing Strategies to Prevent Violent Extremism.”
The very title of the Duke study reveals it is a failure from the beginning.
Has anyone heard someone on television claim to be a “Violent Extremist” fighting for “Violent Extremism?”
100% of those waging war against the West identify themselves as “muslims waging jihad in the cause of Allah to establish an Islamic State (caliphate) under sharia (Islamic Law).”
This Grand Canyon size disconnect from reality should help citizens understand why many local police departments do not Understand the Threat.
Near the beginning of the Executive Summary the Duke report states:
“Policing agencies are unlikely to be successful in creating partnerships to address violent extremism until they establish trusting relationships with the communities they serve.”
And herein lies the problem. America’s leaders have been convinced we cannot defeat the jihadi threat in our communities unless we work with the communities producing the jihadi threat.
Sharia, Muslim Brotherhood doctrine, and evidence in the largest terrorism financing trial ever successfully prosecuted in American history – US v Holy Land foundation for Relief and Development, Northern District of Texas (Dallas) 2008 – all reveal, Islamic organizations in the United States and their personnel work inside government entities, with Jewish and Christian organizations, with the media, in education, and with security organizations (military, police, et al) to (1) influence them and (2) gather intelligence.
Yet around the nation, we see police working at the ground level with jihadis and jihadi organizations.
Police leadership in Prince George’s County, Maryland conducts their Command/Staff training at the Diyanet Center of America in Lanham, Maryland which is owned by the Turkish government.
Influence operation anyone?
Sources in one police department in the Chicago suburbs alert UTT that sharia-adherent muslims (aka jihadis) give input as to who gets hired. The source also noted the department works with the local Muslim Brotherhood Islamic Center.
Jihadi leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood’s Islamic Center of Charlotte (NC) meeting with the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Deputy Chief regarding the shooting of a muslim
The Las Vegas Police Department has a vigorous “outreach” program to the
jihadis Islamic leaders in the community in sin city. See one article here.
Lt. Sasha Larkin (center front) of the Las Vegas Metro PD attends the Islamic Association of Las Vegas
In Arlington, Texas police applied for a Homeland Security grant to improve relations with the growing muslim community. Modeling the Department of Homeland Security’s “muslim outreach” is probably not something for which Texas should strive.
Yet, do the Arlington Police know the Islamic Society of Arlington (TX) is a Muslim Brotherhood mosque which funds terrorism?
The answer is getting the truth about the threat of the Islamic Movement to your local police department, sheriffs, and other local officials. That is the job of well-informed citizens.
UTT stands ready to help.
http://www.UnderstandingTheThreat.com
===========================
CRUSADER says
Islamist Infiltration into Law Enforcement as early as 1968? :
=============================================
SIRHAN SIRHAN and the mystery of Islamic synthetic terror
by Laurent Guyénot
A Palestinian terrorist?
Just hours after Robert’s assassination, the press was able to inform the American people, not only of the identity of the assassin, but also of his motive, and even of his detailed biography. Twenty-four-year-old Sirhan Bishara Sirhan was born in Jordania, and had moved to the United States when his family had been expelled from West Jerusalem in 1948.
After the shooting, a newspaper clipping was found in Sirhan’s pocket, quoting Robert’s following statement: “the United States should without delay sell Israel the 50 Phantom jets she has so long been promised.”
Handwritten notes by Sirhan found in a notebook at his home confirmed that his act had been premeditated and motivated by the hatred of Israel. Jerry Cohen of the Los Angeles Times wrote, in a front page article on June 6, that Sirhan is “described by acquaintances as a ‘virulent’ anti-Israeli” (Cohen opted for “virulent anti-semite” in another article for the The Salt Lake Tribune), and that:
“investigation and disclosures from persons who knew him best revealed [him] as a young man with a supreme hatred for the state of Israel.”
Cohen infers that “Senator Kennedy […] became a personification of that hatred because of his recent pro-Israeli statements.” Cohen further learnt from Los Angeles Mayor Samuel Yorty that:
“About three weeks ago the young Jordanian refugee accused of shooting Sen. Robert Kennedy wrote a memo to himself, […] The memo said: ‘Kennedy must be assassinated before June 5, 1968’—the first anniversary of the six-day war in which Israel humiliated three Arab neighbors, Egypt, Syria and Jordan.”
In a perhaps cryptic final note, Cohen cited Prof. Joseph Eliash of UCLA’s Near Eastern languages and literature department, who remarked that “His name, both first and last, is that of an ancient Arab tribe which once roamed the Syrian Desert,” and that his middle name, Bashara, means “good news.”[1]
In 2008, on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of Bobby’s assassination, this tragic day was installed into the post-9/11 mythology of the Clash of Civilization and the War on Terror. The Jewish Daily Forward wrote:
“One cannot help but note the parallel between Kennedy’s assassination and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In both tragic cases, Arab fanaticism reared its ugly head on American soil, irrevocably changing the course of events in this country.”
“Robert Kennedy was the first American victim of modern Arab terrorism.”
“Sirhan hated Kennedy because he had supported Israel.”
Writing for the Boston Globe, Sasha Issenberg recalled that the death of Robert Kennedy was “a first taste of Mideast terror.” He quotes Harvard professor Alan Dershowitz, a former volunteer in Robert Kennedy’s campaign (better known as Jonathan Pollard’s lawyer), reflecting:
“I thought of it as an act of violence motivated by hatred of Israel and of anybody who supported Israel,”
“It was in some ways the beginning of Islamic terrorism in America. It was the first shot. A lot of us didn’t recognize it at the time.”
For the Jewish Forward, the point was to tell the Jews: “See, it’s always the same eternal hatred of Jews and Israel.” For the Boston Globe, the point was to tell Americans: “We are all Israelis.” (The Boston Globe is owned by the New York Times, controlled by the Sulzberger family, although Dershowitz would dismiss such remark as “nonsense”, in his 2010 article, “Do Jews Control the Media?”).
The fact that Sirhan was from a Christian family was lost on Dershowitz, who speaks of “Islamic terrorism.” But the Jewish Forward took care to mention it, only to add that Islam ran in his veins anyway:
“But what he shared with his Muslim cousins — the perpetrators of September 11 — was a visceral, irrational hatred of Israel. It drove him to murder a man whom some still believe might have been the greatest hope of an earlier generation.”
No doubt such declarations, and worse ones, will be repeated on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of RFK’s death in June 2018. Let’s take them seriously for a moment, and let’s see what kind of anti-Zionist terrorist Sirhan Sirhan was. By looking more closely into his case, perhaps we shall discover something about the nature of this post-modern terrorism that infects our world and our mind since September 11th, 2001.
===========================================================
*** The 50th anniversary of RFK’s assassination is coming up, in June 2018. ***
Stay Tuned!
Sam says
I don’t have any confidence that this trial will shed any light to the attempt to Islamize America. I will send my few dollars of donation to Robert and Pam and pray.
Liberals don’t want to hear Islam. They want to hear “Russian Collusion”
Tim says
VRWC: California’s gun laws aren’t a problem. A girlfriend of mine from CA is shortly headed east in an RV to visit me and other friends. I asked her if she was packing and she said, “Yes, Sylvia will be with me as she always is.”