PUTIN DISCUSSES NUKING ISIS!

Tweet

Vladimir Putin is putting the pressure on ISIS stating that he, "hopes nuclear warheads will not be needed to deal with terrorists."

This, after Russia launched cruise missiles from its submarine at Syria.

President Putin said the new cruise missiles could also be equipped with nuclear warheads - but that he hoped they would never need them.

"With regard to strikes from a submarine. We certainly need to analyse everything that is happening on the battlefield, how the weapons work. Both the [Kalibr] missiles and the Kh-101 rockets are generally showing very good results. We now see that these are new, modern and highly effective high-precision weapons that can be equipped either with conventional or special nuclear warheads."

Russia’s Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu noted that TU-22 bombers have also taken part in ISIS raids and that "significant damage" has been done to ISIS munitions depots and a factory manufacturing mortar rounds and oil facilities -two major targets in Raqqa, the supposed "capital" of ISIS.

Do you think Putins tough talk and strict immigration policies will help keep Russian's more safe than Americans? 

Here is an earlier video of Russian cruise missiles hitting ISIS targets.

Tweet

RYAN SORBA: WHY OBAMA CALLS ISIS, ISIL. FIND OUT NOW!

Tweet

By Ryan Sorba

Those wanting to understand why Barack Obama calls ISIS "ISIL" are in for some controversy. 

ISIS stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria because the group's territory straddles the border between the two countries, as can be seen in the following photo. 

The Red is ISIS Controlled Territory

"ISIL" stands for the Islamic State of Iraq and the "Levant." The Levant is the historic name given to the entire region east of the Mediterranean, from Egypt, east to Iran and Turkey.

As you can see, "the Levant" includes Israel. 

Many are now claiming that Obama has been referring to ISIS as ISIL to cryptically insult Israel and lend the terrorists tacit consent for their plan for Middle East domination.

Incorrectly, the Associated Press has claimed that ISIS was switched to ISIL because, 

In Arabic, the group is known as Al-Dawla Al-Islamiya fi al-Iraq wa al-Sham, or the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham. The term “al-Sham” refers to a region stretching from southern Turkey through Syria to Egypt (also including Lebanon, Israel, the Palestinian territories and Jordan). The group’s stated goal is to restore an Islamic state, or caliphate, in this entire area.

The standard English term for this broad territory is “the Levant.” Therefore, AP’s translation of the group’s name is the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL.

This justification given by the Associated Press however is incorrect.  

In a smart blog post, Syrian analyst Hassan Hassan notes the distinction between "al-Sham" and "Bilad al-Sham"; the former is often used to signify Syria or Damascus, the latter the wider Levant. 

ISIS used "al-Sham" not Bilad al-Sham. Thus, Obama's use of "ISIL" is not even accurate, ISIS is.

Hassan Hassan makes another point about the term "the Levant," which is now a dated and historical term. He notes that it is the equivalent of calling Iraq, "Mesopotamia." Thus, the use of the term "Levant" seems suspicious. Hassan: 

If we concede again that "al-Sham" means not only Syria, then there is a name for that: Greater Syria. When we use the older term "Levant", that should be used alongside the older name "Mesopotamia" for Iraq. When you use modern "Iraq", use the modern term "Greater Syria" along with it — and in that case, it's the Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (still ISIS).

When Obama refers to ISIS as ISIL then, it is both a factual and a political mistake. Not only is it an incorrect translation and a dated historical term like "Mesopotamia," but also because "the Levant" specifically includes Israel. 

Politically, it almost makes Barack Obama sound as though he is Morse coding a message to Israel and Muslims in the middle-east that he is broadening and normalizing the expectations of "ISIL."  

In other words, politically, from the point of view of Isreal, it could sound as if Obama is calling ISIS, The Islamic State of Iraq and Israel! (as well as the rest of the Middle East of course)

It would be the same for Americans if Obama began to call ISIS, ISA -The Islamic State of America.  

Or, The Islamic State of San Bernardino and Redlands. 

It doesn't sound very good to hear your own hometown referred to as "The Islamic State of..." while you are being threatened and attacked by Islamic terrorists.

In addition, as argued by many in France, even referring to the group as the "Islamic State" of anything gives them too much credibility. They are a terrorist organization. 

The name "ISIL" creates a winning mentality, not only because "the Levant" gives them more territory than they could ever procure but because it grants the perception of "statehood." 

This perceived legitimacy formalizes the group among their captives and creates a winning mentality which helps them recruit, and further terrorize.  

If Barack Obama wants to be accurate he ought to call them "DAIISH," the Arabic shorthand for their actual name, al-Dawla al-Islamiya al-Iraq al-Sham.

ISIS finds the acronym DAIISH offensive however because it sounds like the "Daes" ("one who crushes something underfoot") and Dahes ("one who sows discord").

Whatever ISIS is called, Obama should refuse to call them by any name that lends them even so much as the illusion of credibility regarding either statehood or territory.  

I'll leave you with what Rush Limbaugh recently had this to say about the issue: 

 "Oh, and, by the way, just to reiterate something: ISIS versus ISIL. The Levant, includes Israel, includes much of the eastern Mediterranean shoreline. By using the term "ISIL," it is meant to delegitimize Israel. It is meant to include Israel in the Levant, which would make it Palestine. I'm telling you, there's a reason Obama does this, and his audience is not us.

He's calling it ISIL for a foreign audience, not us. And he's the only one doing it. Everybody calls it ISIS. He calls it ISIL. The media tries to tell you there's really no difference, it's the same. There's a huge difference. ISIS, Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, that's two countries. ISIL, Islamic State in Iraq and Levant, which is the whole region, but more importantly, it includes Israel in the Levant and Israel ought not be there. They don't have a right to be there. Levant is us, it's not them. That's Palestine, is what Levant means. Obama is telling them, Don't doubt me."

Tweet

MYSTERY $28K DEPOSITED INTO TERRORISTS BANK ACCOUNT! NEW PHOTOS ENTERING USA, AND MUCH MORE!

Tweet

New Photo Shows Tashfeen Malik and Syad Farook Entering USA

According to the F.B.I. the Redlands, Ca Muslim couple that recently carried out a terrorist attack in nearby San Bernardino had been radicalized for a long period of time.

In the words of David Bowdich, the F.B.I. Assistant Director in charge of the L.A. field office,  

"As the investigation has progressed, we have learned and believe that both subjects were radicalized and have been for quite some time."

The F.B.I's top goal right now is to determine how the terrorist couple became radicalized and by whom, and where. 

The investigation has now spread from Redlands/San Bernardino to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, but the F.B.I. is still searching for clues locally. They have not ruled out arresting Farook's father, Syed Farook Sr. or his mother Rafia Farook. 

Farook’s father recently gave an interview to an Italian media outlet in which he revealed first-hand knowledge that his son supported the so-called Islamic State’s ideology.

The father obviously should have notified authorities at that point. He told the new outlet the following: 

“My son said that he shared [IS leader Abu Bakr] Al Baghdadi’s ideology and supported the creation of the Islamic State. He was also obsessed with Israel.”

The mother, Rafia Farook is reportedly also an active member of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), which promotes the establishment of a caliphate and is connected to a radical Pakistani political group called Jamaat-e-Islami. She received a certificate of appreciation from ICNA’s sisters wing last summer.

The F.B.I. is not ruling out the idea that others may be involved. 

“We have found evidence of pre-planning. We want to find out everyone who profited from it [and] financed it… we will leave no stone unturned, just like I’ve said in the past.”

The F.B.I. has also learned that a $28,500 deposit was made into Farook's bank account from WebBank.com on November 18th, two weeks before the attack. On November 20th Farook withdrew $10,000 cash. In the days before the shooting , there were at least three transders of $5,000 that appear to be to Farook's mother. 

Tweet

Why America is not to blame for Islamic terrorism.

Tweet

By Justin Esthay

It is a common and fallacious assertion from secularists and Muslims alike, that terrorism is a response to American "imperialism," and that the Crusades were a Christian war of aggression waged against Islamic victims. Nothing could be further from the truth. Since the days of Muhammad, a murderer who raided caravans, slaying and robbing those he found, Islam has been expanding through assiduous brutality.


• Islam's war against the west

Contrary to the Crusades being called to forcibly convert Muslim lands to Christianity (which is precisely what Islam had done to get them), it was a war of self-defense in response to centuries of Muslim aggression. The first time European Christians had any significant exposure to Islam was some three hundred years prior to the first Crusade; when Muslims invaded Christian Spain and France (about 711 A.D.). This was the true beginning of the war against terror, which has been ongoing ever since. They were halted in France by Charles Martel ("The Hammer"), but Spain would spend many centuries (until 1492, the year Columbus discovered the "New World") repelling Muslim invaders.

One need simply look to the Cathedral of Otranto, for example, which contains the remains of hundreds of martyrs killed for refusing to convert to Islam when the city of Otranto was taken by Muslim forces in 1480, to establish that Muslim aggression far antecedes any American foreign policy. "The archbishop was beheaded before the altar, his companions were sawn in half, and their accompanying priests were all murdered." 

Long before the first Crusade Muhammad had demanded conversion from the Christian Byzantine Empire (the eastern remnants of the Roman Empire) as the price of safety. The result of the Byzantine's declination was centuries of attack from Muslim armies to compel conversion, until a beleaguered Byzantine Emperor finally appealed to the Pope for help. This, was the cause of the first Crusade; the first of numerous efforts to repel Muslim invaders and reclaim Christian lands lost to Islamic conquest.

"For your brethren who live in the east are in urgent need of your help, and you must hasten to give them the aid which has often been promised them. For, as the most of you have heard, the Turks and Arabs have attacked them and have conquered the territory of Romania as far west as the shore of the Mediterranean and the Hellespont, which is called the Arm of St. George. They have occupied more and more of the lands of those Christians, and have overcome them in seven battles. They have killed and captured many, and have destroyed the churches and devastated the empire. If you permit them to continue thus for awhile with impurity, the faithful of God will be much more widely attacked by them." - Pope Urban II, Calling the first Crusade, 1095 A.D.

The Byzantine Empire ultimately fell to Muslim forces, and the Hagia Sophia, a beautiful church in the Byzantine capital of Constantinople, was converted into a mosque by the invading Muslims. With the fall of the Byzantine Empire a large portion of once Christian lands became Islamic, and is erroneously viewed along with many others, as always having been such by most today.

The advent of Islam, subsequent fall of the Christian Byzantine Empire (red) to Islamic aggression (green), and invasion of Europe and centuries long occupation of Spain can be seen here in a chronological map.

The notion that Christianity was the aggressor against Islam, which did not exist until well over 500 years after Christ walked the earth, is absurd. Damascus, a once mostly Christian city in Syria, and to where Paul was heading when he encountered Christ, was conquered by Muslim invaders who demolished the Basilica of Saint John the Baptist and built a mosque upon it. Syria, now the home of groups like ISIS, is a place unsafe for "infidels" like Paul today.

"The armed Islamist Opposition in Syria has murdered more than 200 Christians in the city of Homs, including entire families with young children. These Islamic gangs kidnapped Christians and demanded high ransoms. In two cases, after the ransoms were paid, the men's bodies were found."

Essentially all the lands now held by Muslims in the middle east were stolen from other peoples, which they often subsequently eradicated, if not by force then by imposition of the "dhimmitude;" measures which render "kafirs" (non-Muslims) second class citizens, impose a tax upon them, and enact rigid statutes which proscribe kafirs from disseminating their faith to others (even their own children). Intended to compel the conversion of conquered subjects, who ultimately acquiesce to escape the onerous conditions of life as a dhimmi, it gradually extirpates different faiths from lands conquered by Islam.

It should also be noted that supplanting a conquered peoples' houses of worship with mosques is a common act of asserting Muslim dominance over a vanquished foe. Sadly, most Americans being historically ignorant of such, do not understand what building a mosque on the site of the 911 terror attack in New York represents. By erecting a mosque upon the site where Islam vanquished its enemy, they are proclaiming the victory of Islam over America.

• Islam declares war against an infant United States

Destroying the absurd leftist assertion that Islamic aggression is the result of American foreign policy (as opposed to the catalyst for such), is the fact that Muslims were attacking American vessels, robbing them, and enslaving their crews during the administrations of our first presidents; before our incipient nation had any significant foreign policy of which to speak regarding Islam, and certainly long before we ever "bombed" any Muslim country. Our Navy was formed in no small part to remedy this problem (i.e. Muslim violence), that we would no longer spend a fifth of our federal budget in ransom and extortion fees (by the time of Jefferson's administration) for "peace" with Islamic states which were attacking us without provocation.

"[H]ow is it possible the great maritime powers of Europe should submit to pay an annual tribute to the little piratical States of Barbary? Would to Heaven we had a navy able to reform those enemies to mankind, or crush them into non-existence."- George Washington, to Marquis de Lafayette, August 15, 1786.

Every American needs to understand a few things:

 • If not for the Crusades which impeded Islamic expansion across Europe, there would be no Europe, nor consequently America as we know it (if at all). One need simply observe the condition of Islamic states, which are spectacles of barbarism and oppression, to see how much we owe to the Crusades.

• Our conflict with Islam is not the result of any thing we do, per se, or any "foreign policy" we currently have. It is the result of Islamic dictum, from Muhammad, which states:

"I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight against the people until they testify that none has the right to be worshiped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah's Apostle,... so if they perform that, then they save their lives and property from me..."

• The only thing your well intended "civility" will accomplish is the facilitation of the Islamic conquest of the west, with far less trouble than those middle eastern lands they took only after violent resistance, and the negation of the sacrifice of countless lives lost in defense of Christian civilization against centuries of Islamic aggression.

A complete withdrawal from, and eschewal of the Islamic region of the world will not produce some magical "peace" with Islam. History has already shown us that being perceived as weak by Islamic states, was a far more expensive foreign policy than warring against them. While we may not be at war with individual Muslims who do not engage in hostile acts against us, the ideology of Islam is inherently incompatible with, and hostile to, American concepts of liberty and governance. As such we are, and ever will be, in contention with "Islam" as an ideology. Those Muslims that don't attack us, don't, and those that do will never be swayed by tepid appeals to "peace." America does not need a leader who can't grasp this reality; because the consequences of such delusion is at best, expensive, and at worst, deadly.

Christians must stop being manipulated into feeling ashamed of their faith, and therefore averse to defending it. The legacy of those Christian warriors which essentially saved the western world should be a source of gratitude and pride for Christians. Without their sacrifice we'd all be speaking Arabic right now.

Tweet

UPDATE! ISIS PLOT TO INFILTRATE REFUGEES UNCOVERED!

Tweet

On Monday the head of the House Homeland Security Committee Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas)  announced that the Committee has determined that Islamic extremists have planned to use the refugee program to enter the United States.

For security reasons, he declined to go into detail.

The announcement is yet another piece of evidence that Barack Hussein Obama's refugee plans are susceptible to infiltration by members of the terrorist organization (ISIS).

“ISIS members in Syria have attempted to exploit it [the refugee program] to get into the United States,” McCaul stated.

“The U.S. government has information to indicate that individuals tied to terrorist groups in Syria have already attempted to gain access to our country through the U.S. refugee program.”

According to McCaul the briefing which exposed the evidence which shows that ISIS is planning to use the refugee program to get anonymous terrorists into the United States happened “earlier this week." 

Muslim terrorists recently murdered 130 innocent people in Paris and 14 in San Bernardino, Calif. 

Muslims Terrorists

Barack Hussein Obama has repeatedly pushed back against warnings that ISIS could attack the United States by sending over fighters as refugees.

ISIS is responsible for the deaths of more than 200,000 since 2011 -many of those deaths brutal. They have dislocated more than 4 million Syrians who were forced flee.

McCaul painted a bleak picture of American national security under the Obama administration.

Tweet

ONLINE DATING PROFILE LISTS CA MUSLIM TERRORIST'S POLITICAL AFFILIATION! YOU'LL NEVER GUESS WHAT IT IS!

Tweet

An online dating profile for San Bernardino Muslim terrorist Syed Farook provides more details into the kind of person he was.

On the website "Arab Lounge" the terrorist Farook lists himself as an  "Allah fearing, calm, thoughtful and simple man.

What a lair.

“I am born and raised here, I try to live as a good Muslim, looking for a girl who has the same outlook, wear hijab, but live the life to the fullest, be my partner for snow boarding, to go out and eat with friends, go camping, working on cars with me. Also be calm cool thought full, love to spend time with friends and family,” he wrote. 

Farook listed his political views as “VERY LIBERAL,” which ran contrary to what many members of the very liberal mainstream media predicted!

Why should we be surprised? Barack Hussein Obama and his very liberal allies have refused to refer to Muslim Terrorists as "Muslim terrorists." Farook's fellows on the "very liberal left" seem to be more concerned with making sure that they don't offend Muslims than with keeping America safe.

 

The terrorist also wrote that he does't like "liars." Awe what a wonderful terrorist, despite the fact that his entire life in Redlands, Ca was one giant lie.

The terrorist Farook also noted that "impulsive buying" got on his nerves after impulsively buying 5,000 bullets. 

He went on to describe himself as "tolerant," and noted that he wanted two to three children. I guess those were just two to three more lies. 

There's online dating for you! I guess the rumors were true! 

When asked to name the “most important thing in a relationship,” Farook said his partner would need to be “guided by and as written in Islam" -at least the rat was truthful about one thing.

"OH yes," he added, "I love to work on cars." 

Farook described the "perfect evening" as "going camping in the mountains sitting around the campfire with extended family and friends." 

Syed Farook murdered 14 people and injured more than a dozen Wednesday after walking into a Christmas party and spraying the room with bullets. 

His wife pledged her allegiance to an ISIS during the attack. 

Al Jazeera is now angry the press showed Tashfeen's face. 

Tweet

Why admitting Syrian refugees is a bad idea.

Tweet

By Justin Esthay

"They're scared of widows and three-year-old orphans." - Barack Obama.

It should go without saying that only a fool would believe that no "threat" could be posed by Muslim women and children. Any yet it must be said; because some people are simply that estranged to reality.

I have no doubt the president's statement was prevarication; he knows the truth; he is complicit. But the average American is far too easily inveigled by demagogues who express ostensibly noble motivations. Thus it must be articulated, to the latter, why a seemingly good thing is in fact a bad thing.

Terrorists commonly exploit civilian populations for purposes of camouflage, indemnifying their operations, and propaganda. They do this because they know their opponents generally view such locations with less suspicion, and would be reluctant to damage or destroy them. That they do this reveals that they're both aware of their enemy's values, and have no compunction about exploiting them to nefarious ends. It's a win/win scenario for them, as it allows them to take advantage of an enemy's aversion to attacking certain demographics or locations, and should the enemy counter attack, allows them to vilify the enemy as murderers of innocents.

Whether the opposing force of the terrorists attack, or do not attack, they lose. Either they accept a tactical disadvantage in perpetuity, or they face being smeared as the killers of women and children.

The use of women and children as human shields, or clandestine agents, is also a common tactic of terrorists across the sea. And following all of this, it's no difficult conclusion to reach, that terrorists will likewise have little compunction about exploiting our society's tendency to view women and children with less scrutiny, if not to by default presume they cannot be other than helpless, innocent victims. What we deem virtue, or compassion, they view as a strategic weakness.

People have a dangerous propensity to project themselves onto other human beings. The simple fact is these people do not share our beliefs, or ethical standards regarding how human societies should operate, or how man should treat his fellow man. And they will (just like Socialists) use our values against us at every opportunity. Indeed, they believe the deception and exploitation of their fellow man a divine mandate.

Not acknowledging this or taking steps to counter it does not make us "better." It makes us stupid, and if we intransigently cling to this deluded notion, destined for defeat. You cannot overcome an enemy you perpetually allow a plethora of tactical advantages. The chivalrous war, waged against a unscrupulous opponent, is a deluded tactic which places comportment over survival. It's tantamount to a boxer fighting an opponent with razor tipped brass knuckles, but thinking he's winning some moral victory by refusing to "stoop to his level."

But enough metaphorical exposition. Let's get to the facts. And going forward it should be understood that this post, as most others I contribute, will contain links to websites which allow the reader to learn what I already know, and to better understand allusions I make to things which may not be commonly known to others.

The Islamic terrorists across the sea have already perpetrated to a far greater degree, that to which the Socialists across the sea merely aspired decades ago. In 1942 Nazi operatives seeking to sabotage or destroy American infrastructure illegally immigrated to the United States.

"The Nazis hoped that sabotage teams would be able to slip into America at the rate of one or two every six weeks."

It was only by fortuitous chance that they were discovered and subsequently thwarted. But imagine if we'd allowed tens of thousands of German speaking refugees into the U.S. That would arguably have been the preferred avenue for entering the country, and almost certainly would have been attempted by Nazi subversives.

Not only did Democrat FDR not accept droves of Japanese refugees into the U.S., but he interned Japanese Americans. Yet now we must be subjected to the paradigmatic, abject hypocrisy, of members of the party that threw people into camps domestically for potentially being sympathetic to the enemy, admonishing us on the indignity imposed by refusing entry to people we have no obligation to accept, and which have now been proven to have been infiltrated by terrorists.

It must be understood, despite what idiots on the left claim, that we are no less at war with Islamic Terrorists, than we were the National Socialist terrorists who sought to perpetrate destruction and murder on our shores during World War 2. And in a time of war, people from the countries of your enemies, are perhaps those it would be least prudent to admit into your own society.

There's also the fact the federal government has no Constitutional authority to allocate taxpayer funds to the care or support of foreign born refugees. (Parentheses mine.)

"Mr. Madison [...] acknowledged, for his own part, that he could not undertake to lay his finger on that article in the Federal Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents." - History of Congress, January, 1794.

"Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government. It would puzzle any gentleman to lay his finger on any part of the Constitution which would authorize the government to interpose in the relief of (foreign) sufferers." - James Madison, The Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution [Elliot's Debates, Volume 4] On the Memorial of the Relief Committee of Baltimore, for the Relief of St. Domingo Refugees.

The Socialist left has no interest in "helping" Syrian refugees. Those who support the mass genocide of children domestically, citing the imagery of children drowning abroad as the basis of their support, is a moral farce only an abject dullard would imbibe.

Why do these images not stir their conscience and animate them to action?

Instead we shall be subjected to the party that murders their own children by the millions, defending a faith in which mothers rejoice when their children blow themselves up, lecturing us on the sanctity of life. And as usual I see no conservatives of prominence even acknowledging these things, much less rebuking these two colluding death cults, to any meaningful extent. They simply sit there and suffer the left's absurd bloviation.
   
The left's goal in this instance, as with their immigration policy at large, is to deluge the nation with large numbers of foreigners purely for the purposes of inducing a demographic shift in the Democrat party's favor. At some point the millions of immigrants allowed into the country illegally, for example, will be amnestied and allowed to vote. And they will naturally vote for the party that both supported their entry and subsequently provided them with generous stipends from the public treasury.

This has nothing to do with philanthropy, and everything to do with purchasing votes with funds from the public treasury; the purpose of all leftist derived or supported public "assistance."

Even the Hebrews, who suffered greatly from the unwillingness of others to accept their own refugees, refuse to accept large numbers of Syrian refugees.

"We must control our borders, against both illegal migrants and terrorism." - Benjamin Netanyahu.

Because Netanyahu correctly acknowledges, that accepting large influxes of foreigners serves only to dilute your own culture, and erode the stability and safety of your state. It's deleterious to your own interests, and even dangerous.

But just as dangerous as the left's policies, is the credulity of many on the Right, who are easily duped into embracing a policy based upon specious rhetoric. This is illustrated by the fact that millions of "Christians" promptly accepted the rationale for admitting Syrian refugees into the U.S., from what is indisputably the most anti-Christian president in American history; a man who often and openly expresses abject antipathy for Israel, Christianity, and America in general. But all he had to do, all any Socialist has to do, is dispense a few Christian-sounding platitudes, and mention the Bible or Jesus, and just like that the dimwitted Joel Osteens of the nation are sold.

This unacceptable stupidity, on which virtually all Socialist schemes rely for success, must stop.

Tweet

DEVELOPING: FIVE TERRORISTS ARRESTED IN BORDER TOWN WITH STEEL CYLINDERS IN THEIR BACKPACKS!

Tweet

Judicial Watch and Drudge Report are reporting some disturbing news out of an Arizona town called Amado tonight, where five middle eastern men were arrested when border patrol agents spotted the men crossing a ranch property.

The town is situated about 35 miles from Tuscon.

The five middle eastern Muslim terrorists were found to be from the middle east and carried with them stainless steel cylinders.

Border patrol agents turned the suspected terrorists over to Homeland Security which now has them in custody.

America, it appears, is under attack and there is not telling how many terrorists have already crossed Barack Obama's porous southern border. Project Veritas recently exposed just how easy it can be to cross over from Mexico into the Untied States in the following video.

Apparently, this story is being covered up. It was told to Judicial Watch by local law enforcement but ICE agents claim to know nothing about it.

"Special Agent Remus told JW that there is no record of this week’s incident in Amado and that he knew nothing about it. JW also put in a call to DHS headquarters, but received no response." 

It should be noted that that mainstream media does not seem to be covering this story, but the Drudge Report is, which is one of the largest news websites on the internet and Judicial Watch is a very credible organization.

They may be covering up the story to keep people from freaking out, but I'd rather be freaked out than dead.

The disturbing incident comes just days after 6 terrorists -one from Afghanistan and six from Pakistan were arrested in Patagonia, another ranch town about 20 miles from the border.

 Similarly, last fall, an ISIS plot was uncovered as a result of Judicial Watch reporting.

The plot was going to be orchestrated from Ciudad Juarez to attack the U.S. with car bombs and other vehicle born explosive devices.

On another occasion 4 ISIS terrorists were arrested in McAllen, Texas -a very corrupt liberal town with a huge number of illegal aliens.

I don't feel safe with Barack Hussein Obama in power. Do you?

Tweet

UPDATE! PICS OF SYED FAROOK AND HIS APARTMENT IN REDLANDS, CA

Tweet

Muslim Terrorist Syed Farook

These are the latest photos from inside the home of Muslim terrorist Syed Farook and his terrorist wife Tashfeen Malik.

Investigators learned that Tashfeen Malik left a post on a Facaebook page using an alias pledging her allegiance to ISIS and its leader al-Baghdadi.

The FBI is now officially classifying the shooting as an "Act of Terror."

Syed Farook was in contact with known international terrorists by phone and through social media.

ISIS has officially declared that Syed Farook and Malik were "supporters" of ISIS.

UPDATE: Photo of Tafsheen Malik

Behind the Burka

Terrorist Pledged Allegiance to ISIS leader Al Baghdadi Before Attacks

Tweet

The left's love affair with Islamic terrorism.

Tweet

By Justin Esthay

I often see people on the Right puzzled by the left's frequent alignment with Islamic "radicals." It seems to them an unlikely, or contradictory, alliance. But such a pairing is only "odd" to those ignorant of history. Socialists have an affinity for Islamic terrorists, because Socialists too have long utilized terrorism to achieve their socio-political goals, from Lenin's "Red Terror," to Bill Ayers's bombing of public buildings, to ELF's destruction of private property. The left is neither a stranger to terrorism, nor collaborating with Islam as a means to an end.

It's virtually completely forgotten today that the German National Socialist (Nazi) military sought to establish Muslim divisions; e.g., the 21st Waffen Mountain Division of the SS Skanderbeg.

"In May 1944, members of the division arrested 281 Jews in Pristina and handed them over to the Germans, who transported them to the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp, where many were killed."

American Socialists (Democrats) also consistently align themselves with Muslims, and are blatantly antisemitic, as illustrated by the Obama administration making a deal with Iran which will allow them to develop nuclear weapons, despite the the fact Iran has openly expressed a desire to eradicate Israel (the Jews), and the Obama administration's incessant defense of Muslims following Islamic terrorist attacks. So it should come as no surprise, when a leftist sides with the PLO over Israel, with Jihadists over America, or says something like this.

Now, read the following quotation, and replace "kulak" with "banker" and "grain" with "wealth."

"You must make an example of these people. Hang (I mean hang publicly, so that people see it) at least 100 kulaks, rich bastards, and known bloodsuckers. Publish their names. Seize all their grain. ... Do all this so that for miles around people see it all, understand it, tremble, and tell themselves that we are killing the bloodthirsty kulaks and that we will continue to do so..." - Vladimir Lenin, The Black Book of Communism.

 Stalin on how previous efforts to abolish the kulaks (i.e., rich) as a class were insufficient.

"In order to oust the kulaks as a class, the resistance of this class must be smashed in open battle... Without it, no substantial, let alone complete, collectivisation of the countryside is conceivable. That is well understood by our poor and middle peasants, who are smashing the kulaks and introducing complete collectivisation. That, evidently, is not yet understood by some of our comrades. Hence, the Party's present policy in the countryside is... the new policy of eliminating the kulaks as a class. - Joseph Stalin, Concerning the Policy of Eliminating of the Kulaks as a Class.

The "Occupy Wall Street" protests were but one example of Socialist subversives pursuing what Stalin describes above here in present day America. Ultimately once the Marxist revolutionaries assume absolute power, whatever portion of the population refuses to embrace Socialism will simply be exterminated, i.e., killed. As one Bolshevik stated: "To overcome our enemies we must have our own socialist militarism. We must carry along with us 90 million out of the 100 million of Soviet Russia's population. As for the rest, we have nothing to say to them. They must be annihilated." 

Now hear the same plan being devised by the Marxist revolutionary group of which Bill Ayers (Obama's buddy) was a member.

One will of course also immediately notice that the above account is exactly the same thing Roseanne Barr was advocating in the previous video clip.

You will see this same Marxist tripe, via the incitement of the proletariat to hate the bourgeois, and to empower the state to confiscate their property, being euphemistically espoused every single day by American Democrats.

Simply put, these two egregiously anti-Semitic groups which both subscribe to a totalitarian ideology, and have engaged in terrorism to advance that ideology, have far more in common with each other than they do American Christian capitalists. 

Those on the Right need to reach the realization, and soon, that the entire Democrat party has been subverted by hardcore Socialists. Only then will the Right truly understand why Democrats like Nancy Pelosi have lauded the "Occupy" movement, and routinely exhibit a conspicuous predilection for Islam. They also need to reach the realization, equally soon, that a large portion of the American population (e.g., Democrat voters) have embraced Socialist principles dispensed under deceptive appellations, such as "liberal," "progressive," etc.

If the Right cannot accept this reality, it cannot hope to address the true problem, and has consigned itself to certain defeat. It is up to all of us to confront these people, expose them for what they truly are, and defeat them if we wish to bequeath to our grandchildren a "free" America.

Tweet

UPDATE: NAMES, PHOTOS OF ALL 14 VICTIMS OF CA TERROR ATTACK

Tweet

Denise Peraza, 27  

    

                                                                                     

Jennifer Stevens, 22

                                                         
Denise Peraza, 27 and Jennifer Stevens. 22 are still alive and fighting for their lives in the hospital.


Victims include:

*The cousin of an NFL Giants player Nat Berhe

*An anti-ISIS Campaigner

*A mother-of-three who fled Islamic extremism in Iran as a teenager for a safe life in the U.S

All 14 victims killed in the San Bernardino massacre have now been identified by the coroner.

Sheriff John McMahon stated that, "This is an enormous personal tragedy." 

"We must stand strong and offer support to each individual affected by this senseless attack."

Those killed in the shooting are: 

Aurora Godoy, 26, of San Jacinto;

Yvette Velasco, 27, of Fontana; 

Sierra Clayborn, 27, of Moreno Valley;

Tin Nguyen, 31, of Santa Ana;

Michael Wetzel, 37, of Lake Arrowhead;

Robert Adams, 40, of Yucaipa;

Larry Kaufman, 42, of Rialto;   

Shannon Johnson, 45, of Los Angeles; 

Bennetta Bet-Badal, 46, of Rialto; 

Harry Bowman, 46, of Upland;

Juan Espinoza, 50, of Highland; 

Nicholas Thalasinos, 52, of Colton;

Damian Meins, 58, of Riverside;  

Isaac Amanios, 60, of Fontana; 

Authorities have identified the evil Syed Rizwan Farook, a 28-year-old terrorist who worked as a county restaurant inspector and his evil wife Tashfeen Malik, 27 as the two people directly behind the shooting.

Killer, Islmist Syed Farooq

Harry Bowman, 46, Upland


Isaac Amanios, 60, Fontana

Aurora Godoy, 26, of San Jacinto

Bennetta Bet-Badal, 46, of Rialto -far right. 

Tin Nguyen, 31, of Santa Ana


Robert Adams, 40, of Yucaipa


Nicholas Thalasinos, 52, of Colton


Yvette Velasco, 27, of Fontana


Damian Meins, 58, of Riverside


Michael Wetzel, 37, of Lake Arrowhead


Sierra Clayborn, 27, of Moreno Valley


Shannon Johnson, 45, of Los Angeles


Juan Espinoza, 50, of Highland


Larry Kaufman, 42, of Rialto


The Injured

Denise Peraza, 27


Jennifer Stevens, 22

Tweet