Our Jihadist President

prayer curtain

The Daily Caller outlines a very disturbing notion emanating from the White House regarding our Constitutional liberties and Barack Obama’s predilection to render them void any time he sees fit.

“The president … will not now be shy about expressing a view or taking the steps that are necessary to try to advocate for the safety and security of our men and women in uniform” whenever journalists’ work may provoke jihadist attacks, spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters at the White House’s daily briefing.

“Steps necessary” up to and including disemboweling our First Amendment rights, apparently, for some notion of “protecting” our armed forces.  You know, the ones who risk and give their lives to uphold that First Amendment?  Yeah, them.   One should not be shocked at the criticism of free speech by this Administration, nor the rationalization of the violence perpetrated by the militant Islamists.  Despite the usual platitudes about how such violence is never justified, Obama and his minions have consistently provided just such justification by siding with the Jihadis in their public condemnation of criticism of Islam.

Obama’s willingness to pressure media outlets, to quit defending First Amendment rights and also to mollify jihadis, reflects Obama’s overall policy of minimizing conflict with militant Islam.

He also repeatedly praised Islam and Muslims, and criticized criticism of Islam. “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” he told a worldwide TV audience during a September 2012 speech at the United Nations.

This President wishes to disarm law-abiding Americans and abrogate our Second Amendment rights, ostensibly so we can all be “safer”, leaving the government with a monopoly on violence and a citizenry without a last redress against tyranny from that government.  Now, Obama wants to stifle the Press, and one presumes, other manners of free expression that criticize Islam, once again for the “safety” of our men and women in the armed forces.   The intellectual fascism of the Leftist Establishment will be codified as a legitimate power of government.

The chilling effect* on free speech by the actions and threat of actions by government at any level, long identified as unconstitutional, will be a cornerstone of Barack Obama’s erosion of our liberties.  It will be a favored tool used for the stifling of political and social dissent not just by leftist social organizations and academic institutions, (and Hollywood), but also by a government already practiced in these six years in using regulatory and statutory powers as extralegal coercion to suppress political dissent.   Hillary Clinton’s remarks in the wake of the Benghazi terrorist attack smack of such suppression.  Martin Dempsey disgraced his uniform and forfeited his credibility by doing the same.

Of course, Barack Obama could protect our armed forces by halting the willful destruction of the moral fiber of those who serve our country with social experimentation, and ceasing the blunting of the readiness of our operating forces in order to feed yet more tens of billions into a $1.7 trillion dollar welfare furnace.  But he will not.  In fact, he will not even name America’s enemy, militant Islam.  Instead, the only term his Administration will use to describe those who actively seek our destruction, “violent extremists”, is applied as liberally to the Left’s political opposition as it is to those Islamic extremists who would perpetrate another 9/11.

Obama’s 2009 Cairo speech was exactly what it sounded like.  It was a klaxon to our Islamist enemies that one of their own was now in charge.  He will not criticize them because he is philosophically one of them.  The frequent visits by members of the Muslim Brotherhood to the White House, a foreign policy more accommodating to Iran and Cuba than Israel and Britain, and an undeviating record of foreign affairs decisions resulting in maximum damage to US power and prestige have long since passed the point of being viewed as coincidental blunders.   How do we know?  Because Barack Obama claims the power to keep American citizens from saying so.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

(*The chilling effect occurs when any Constitutionally-protected activity is unduly discouraged by actions or threats of action by the government against those individuals and groups as a consequence of exercising that activity.)

Charlie Hebdo Attacked By Muslim Terrorists

You’ve seen the news. And you’re already seeing the craven apologists for Islamic terrorism groveling and justifying and otherwise excusing barbarism. Indeed, somehow, the Obama administration, charged with upholding the First Amendment principles of freedom of speech, found time back in 2012 to weigh in on an obscure French satirical magazine, and surprising no one, came down on the side of the heckler’s veto:

WASHINGTON (CBSDC) — The White House criticized French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in 2012 for publishing cartoons mocking the Prophet Muhammad.
Then White House Press Secretary Jay Carney questioned the magazine’s judgment after publishing images of Muhammad naked.
“We are aware that a French magazine published cartoons featuring a figure resembling the Prophet Muhammad, and obviously we have questions about the judgment of publishing something like this,” Carney told reporters in September 2012.

I find myself sadly resigned to the fact that barbarous Muslim fanatics will from time to time go upon murderous rampages. It is simply what happens.

But when a society begins to question whether they should be importing a population known for such, the political class immediately chides them and scolds them for being racist, rather than realist. That is what outrages me.

Our pusillanimous White House cannot even trouble itself to use the word terrorism, instead relying on the non-judgmental term “violence.”

CDR Salamander just looked at the issue of immigrant Muslim populations skewing the politics of an open society Monday. There are literally neighborhoods where the parent society has effectively ceded sovereignty to them. So to in the suburbs of Paris, parts of England, and to some extent, here in Dearborn, Michigan.

We’ll be warned for weeks about a backlash against Muslims that never seems to actually occur.

Maybe it is time it does.

mohammed-cartoons charlie hebdo muhammed cartoons 2012

mohammed-cartoons charlie hebdo muhammed cartoons 2012

The Problem With Attribution of Cyber Attacks

r-SONY-HACK-HACKED-BREACH-SECURITY-VULNERABLE-PLAYST-large570

…is that it is all but impossible.  A skillful black hat can easily lead investigators down paths they want them to take, while obscuring the true origins of a network breach.  Mimicking attack vectors, using code associated with known hacking entities, even using language in the coding that points to known entities or countries, are common methods employed by those who wish to leave a false trail as to the origin of network attacks or exploits.  (Of course, the most dangerous of that lot can hide for months or years the fact that there has been any network exploit at all.)

There was much discussion in the office this week about the FBI’s announcement that they had what amounts to definitive proof that the DPRK had perpetrated the now-famous hacking of Sony Pictures.   I was definitely in a minority with my skepticism, for two reasons.  The first is that I have a very hard time believing anything coming out of a Federal agency in this Administration.  The Department of Justice, the IRS, the EPA, The State Department, Homeland Security, have all promulgated bald-faced lies to the American people, largely to cover up criminal and unconstitutional activity and/or the incompetence of those in charge.  The second is the rather unrealistic understanding the Federal Government (and DoD in particular) has of how the Internet works.  They THINK they know.  But they don’t.

Apparently, I am not alone in my skepticism.   From the Daily Beast:

So, malware found in the course of investigating the Sony hack bears “strong” similarities to malware found in other attacks attributed to North Korea.

This may be the case—but it is not remotely plausible evidence that this attack was therefore orchestrated by North Korea.

The FBI is likely referring to two pieces of malware in particular, Shamoon, which targeted companies in the oil and energy sectors and was discovered in August 2012, and DarkSeoul, which on June 25, 2013, hit South Korea (it was the 63rd anniversary of the start of the Korean War).

Even if these prior attacks were co-ordinated by North Korea—and plenty of security experts including me doubt that—the fact that the same piece of malware appeared in the Sony hack is far from being convincing evidence that the same hackers were responsible. The source code for the original “Shamoon” malware is widely known to have leaked. Just because two pieces of malware share a common ancestry, it obviously does not mean they share a common operator. Increasingly, criminals actually lease their malware from a group that guarantees their malware against detection. Banking malware and certain “crimeware” kits have been using this model for years.

So the first bit of evidence is weak.

But the second bit of evidence given by the FBI is even more flimsy:

“The FBI also observed significant overlap between the infrastructure used in this attack and other malicious cyber activity the U.S. government has previously linked directly to North Korea. For example, the FBI discovered that several Internet protocol (IP) addresses associated with known North Korean infrastructure communicated with IP addresses that were hardcoded into the data deletion malware used in this attack.”

What they are saying is that the Internet addresses found after the Sony Picture attack are “known” addresses that had previously been used by North Korea in other cyberattacks.

To cyber security experts, the naivety of this statement beggars belief. Note to the FBI: Just because a system with a particular IP address was used for cybercrime doesn’t mean that from now on every time you see that IP address you can link it to cybercrime. Plus, while sometimes IPs can be “permanent”, at other times IPs last just a few seconds.

Now, the FBI’s conclusions may be correct, and the DPRK may be officially or unofficially behind the breach.  But TDB raises some important points.  The DPRK can claim that a skilled hacker can make the evidence point back to them with little effort.  And indeed this is a correct assessment.  Why the Administration’s jump to blame the DPRK?   Perhaps, as the article states, it is yet another example of amplifying and manipulating an event (a good crisis not going to waste?) as justification for yet more government control via draconian regulation.

Blaming North Korea offers an easy way out for the many, many people who allowed this debacle to happen; from Sony Pictures management through to the security team that were defending Sony Picture’s network.

You don’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to see that blaming North Korea is quite convenient for the FBI and the current U.S. administration. It’s the perfect excuse to push through whatever new, strong, cyber-laws they feel are appropriate, safe in the knowledge that an outraged public is fairly likely to support them.

I will be writing more about so-called “Net Neutrality” in the near future.  But be certain that the regulations proposed by the Obama Administration have little to do with true net neutrality (despite the rather infantile assertions of some) and much more to do with expanding the regulatory power of the Federal Government over the content of the internet.   With the mainstream news media either firmly behind the Far Left, or beholden to them for reasons other than intellectual agreement, trust in the Big News outlets is at an all-time low.  It is on the internet where the fabrications of both the Obama Administration and its lap-dog agents in the press are torn apart by people with facts and experience, and people like Holder and Hillary and entities like the NYT and MSNBC are shown to be liars.  So the assertion in the above citation is certainly plausible.  To some of us, it is at least as plausible as the FBI’s proclamations of incontrovertible evidence of North Korea’s guilt in the Sony breach.

Domestic Enemies: 2014

2duz5dv

If you read here more than a little, you are familiar with my use of the term “enemies, domestic”.  For the uninitiated, those words are a part of my oath of office as a Commissioned Officer in the United States Marine Corps.  They define, in part, those from whom I have sworn on my life to defend the Constitution from.  Just who are those people?  Well, DaveO among our friends at Op-For provides some superb erudition to the subject:

In August of 2013, I posed the question “Who are ‘Domestic Enemies?’” This question stemmed from comments in an earlier post provided by Mike Burke and Slater. In September of 2013, Colonel Joseph L. Prue, USAF, in his post  “Identifying the domestic enemy” pulled this definition from our Constitution:

Amendment 14, Section 3 states, “No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.” As a military officer, I honed in on the words military and insurrection. To me, this meant that any insurgent against the United States shall not hold any public office to include civil or military.

The Constitutional parameters of: 1) engaging in insurrection or rebellion against the Constitution; or 2) to have given aid and comfort to the enemies of the Constitution.

By that definition we’ve got a  LOT of domestic enemies in America. Folks love to argue that President Obama’s [still unsigned?] amnesty is the very definition of rebellion against the Constitution. Others, myself included, believe Senator Reid of Utah and the anti-war groups such as Code Pink did gave aid and comfort to AQ and its offshoots and the Taliban up until Obama won the presidency, and then the groups were quickly hustled off to rest and recuperate until the next Republican POTUS appears.

But the folks in and behind the anti-war crowd were never anti-war, just anti-America and if hampering the war effort hurt America, they were all for it. Once Obama won, these people could turn to more productive pursuits. They are working on an “American Spring.” Legitimate protests of law enforcement are being hijacked to bring about rebellion. There are problems with race in America, as well as problems enforcing the an unknowable and incoherent body of law. Domestic enemies don’t care about race or relations with the police – domestic enemies wish to supplant the Constitution and become their own law and engage in mass murder. The NSA knows who they are, where they live, and who is paying them. January 20, 2017 can’t come soon enough – we need to cut out this cancer of domestic enemies.

Every link Dave puts in his post is worth the read.  This Administration has embarked on a systematic shredding of our Constitution, and with it, our liberties protected thereby.  The 14th Amendment has already been a casualty, when the Attorney General defined just who would face prosecution for crimes, based on skin color.  DaveO is entirely correct.  January of 2017 cannot come soon enough.

Justice Department Looking for "Race-Based Discrimination" at Polls

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4MTQVMatW0]

WAPO tells us that Eric Holder’s Justice Department is out looking for “race-based discrimination” in today’s mid-term voting.  In a statement earlier regarding the monitoring, Holder said:

“I want the American people to know that the Justice Department will stand vigilant — working in a fair and nonpartisan manner to ensure that every voter can cast his or her ballot free of intimidation, discrimination or obstruction,”

No comment about whether or not that includes New Black Panther thugs standing menacingly outside polling places with cudgels.  I think, based on precedent, you can be fairly certain it does not.   The despicable and repugnant race-baiting charlatan masquerading as the Attorney General set aside the Fourteenth Amendment a long time ago.  And has proceeded to violate the First, Second, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Ninth, and Tenth Amendments routinely.   When we wonder where our Constitutional liberties went, look no farther than Obama and Holder and their cabal of totalitarian, statist race mongers to find out who took them.

The individual carrying the night stick in the above video at the Pennsylvania polling station, the incident which Eric Holder REFUSED to investigate because it reflected poorly on “his people”, is named Maruse Heath, aka King Samir Shabazz.  And he was arrested in New York last year for wearing body armor and carrying a loaded and unlicensed handgun.   One has to wonder where ol’ Samir Shabazz is now, and whether or not Holder intervened to get him out of jail.   After all, I am sure he was only arrested because the cops be racissssss……

****************************************************************

Seems perhaps Eric Holder could have used fewer racism-sniffing election monitors, and a few more people to help carry more than 64,000 documents regarding Fast and Furious over to the House Committee.  I am sure the dump of tens of thousands of pages of possibly incriminating evidence after the point at which such revelations could have affected the voters’ perception of the Democrats in a mid-term election is simply an astounding coincidence.  But Committee Chair Darryl Issa isn’t letting go until he gets everything Holder was ordered to hand over.  Bad for Holder.  Good for civil liberties.  Funny how that works inversely, innit?

"We are here from Mexico and came by train"

141031-isis-leaflets-mn-1420_fc12e695f9c6e3ffba016803254d9376.nbcnews-ux-640-440

NBC News tells us that ISIS propaganda leaflets have been found near Marine Corps Base Quantico, VA.  Which also happens to be the location of the FBI Academy.  The leaflets reportedly announce in Arabic that “We are here from Mexico and came by train”.

But I am sure there isn’t anything to worry about.   In fact, I am positive that they are counterfeit.  Why?

Because the folks at DHS have already told us that suggestions that ISIS terrorists have crossed the deliberately wide-open Southwestern US Border are “categorically false”.  And that “DHS continues to have no credible intelligence to suggest terrorist organizations are actively plotting to cross the southwest border”

That makes me feel better.

Because the chances of Ebola reaching US shores is “unlikely”.    Al-Nusrah Islamic extremists are “moderate”.  The Benghazi attacks were not terrorism.  The IRS scandal was only low-level employees in Cincinnati.  Fast and Furious was started under Bush.  The Obamas didn’t know about Jeremiah Wright’s racist, anti-Semitic rants.  The biggest terrorist threat to the US is from white male Veterans who believe in the Constitution.  Global warming exists and is Man’s fault.   If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.  The unemployment rate is dropping.  We can trust Iran not to build nukes.  This Administration isn’t anti-Israel.  The CIA didn’t tell the President about ISIS.   Voter ID laws are unpopular.   No lobbyists hold policy jobs.   This will be the most transparent Presidency ever.

So however could I doubt Jeh Johnson and his razor-sharp spokespeople at DHS when they tell me something such as terrorists crossing our open borders is “categorically false”?   It’s not like Johnson’s skin color played any part in being hired as DHS Secretary, because race is never an issue with this White House.

These leaflets may be forgeries, and represent nothing more than someone’s idea of a prank.  Then again, they may be the genuine article.   Whatever, the one thing we can count on from the Obama Administration is full disclosure of the truth, regardless of any embarrassment that it might cause.  It isn’t as if they would lie to the American people, would they?

 

Hillary Clinton, Marxist-Leninist

From Breitbart.  Hillary was speaking yesterday evening at a fund raiser for far-left Democratic Senate candidate Martha Coakley.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PyUoCiWsTfI]

If “corporations and businesses” aren’t the creators of jobs, that leaves but one entity to generate employment: The Government.  Precisely the Statist collectivism of Marx and Lenin.  Shared, by the way, with Saul Alinsky, the subject of so many gushing words of devotion from the very same Hillary Clinton when she was a young radical.  News flash:  Hillary is still that (now not so young) radical, having not tempered her far-left secular socialist-communist views one iota.   In this, she is entirely in lock-step with the current Administration, and its effeminate and anti-capitalist Alinskyite radical, Barack Obama.  And, if the government is the creator of jobs, rest assured that they will determine what jobs will be created, where they will be created, who will work those jobs (race/gender/religious/sexual preference quotas, anyone?), and what those workers will earn.  Immediately following will be regulations of where those workers live, what they buy, how and where they travel, how and if they vote…  all of which sounds familiar to adults of a certain age.

Given the means, she would make us into Iron Curtain Eastern Europe, replete with the suppression of freedom and government persecution which oppressed hundreds of millions and put to death more millions of victims for five decades.  But that will be okay, because THEY’RE in charge, and if their motives are noble, the suffering and privation of the bourgeoisie is a small price to pay.  But worry not.   You will need only to work for the collective according to your capabilities.  For which you will receive according to your need.

When you discuss Candidate Hillary as we approach 2016, do not be afraid to use the term “communist”.  She has told us she is precisely that.  As recently as last night.

A brother in arms

ICYMI, Bruce MacKinnon, the editorial cartoonist for the Halifax Chronicle-Herald, created one of the most moving tributes I’ve seen since the Challenger accident.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/editorial-cartoon/2014-10-23-editorial-cartoon

The unknown soldier aids the unarmed guard.

Cpl. Nathan Cirillo of the Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders was just 24. Rest in peace, sir.

The Attacks in Canada

The news is still breaking on an attack  in Canada, including the Parliament.

Multiple gunmen opened fire at the Canadian Parliament complex, shooting at least one soldier and spraying as many as 30 shots inside the government building just two days after a terror attack in Quebec shook the nation, officials said.

The shots rang out just before 10 a.m., and were quickly followed by reports of “several shooting incidents in downtown Ottawa,” including at a mall, according to a tweet from police. The shooting at the government complex came after witnesses said they saw two men jump out of a Toyota Corolla and run toward the National War Memorial, where one opened fire on a soldier, officials told the Ottawa Sun. The gunmen then ran to the Parliament building, where witnesses later said they saw one gunman down near the library. Bernard Trottier, a Toronto-area MP, tweeted that the gunman inside Centre Block “has been shot and killed.” The other was reportedly being sought.

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and guess it wasn’t the Methodists.

This comes two days after a radicalized Muslim convert attacked Canadian soldiers with his car.

We’ve spent a goodly portion of our life gently teasing our northern neighbors. But we’ve also always liked Canada. A huge nation with a small population, Canada has produced some of the heartiest, most successful warriors the world has known. They’ve stood side by side with the US through multiple campaigns and wars.

This attack this morning certainly fits the template of the call by ISIS for individuals to attack the West at home. Individuals and small groups making random, spectacular assaults to sow fear. And we should expect some of the same here.

Prayers for our cousins to the north.