Attacker in downtown NYC bloodbath shouted ‘Allahu Akbar’
|| NY Post
“A man in a pickup truck killed seven people when he drove onto the West Side bike path in lower Manhattan Tuesday afternoon — and then shouted “Allahu Akbar” as he got out of the car with fake guns, police sources said.
The suspected terror attack happened around 3:15 p.m., when a man in a flatbed pickup truck from Home Depot veered onto the bike path at West St., a few blocks north of Chambers St., police said.
The suspect, who was shot by police, then plowed his car into up to 23 people on the path, killing seven and injuring more than a dozen others, according to cops.
He continued driving south and hit another car, then got out and displayed “imitation firearms,” police said.
The man then shouted, “Allahu Akbar,” according to police sources.
Witnesses described a scene of terror, as people fled for safety.
“Jesus! A car just ran over 2 people and then crashed into a school bus. I see two dead bodies and citibikes on the floor destroyed,” a Twitter user wrote.
“What happened was there was a car crash… he came out of one of the cars. He had two guns,” a 14-year-old Stuyvesant HS student said. “We thought it was a Halloween thing. He started running around the highway. There was another guy in a green shirt that was chasing him around.”
“I heard four to six gunshots — everybody starts running,” she added.
Video of the scene shows at least two people lying limp on the street. Photos show a smashed-up Home Depot rental truck and two mangled Citi Bikes.
Counter-terror police were searching the truck for explosives.
“Oh my god I just heard gun shots and ran with my dog. Downtown. F–k,” Josh Groban tweeted.
Police shut down the FDR Drive south of 34th Street to rush victims to Bellevue Hospital.”
ICE Fights Back Against New York City’s Sanctuary Policy
– Daily Caller
“Immigration and Customs Enforcement is feuding with New York City’s stated policy of non-compliance with federal immigration detainers.
The detainers from ICE ask for local law enforcement to hold an illegal immigrant in custody until federal agents can retrieve the illegal alien. An ICE press release Friday said, “ICE arrests convicted Mexican national released from local custody after detainer was ignored.”
ICE officers arrested a Mexican national, Luis Alejandro Villegas, on Wednesday just weeks after he was released by New York Police Department officials who ignored an immigration detainer. Villegas was in local custody for driving while intoxicated, and he previously served five years in prison for armed robbery. He was deported back to Mexico in 2007 following his stint in prison.
“Villegas is a criminal alien who was released back into our New York communities, posing an increased and unnecessary risk to those who live in this great city,” Thomas R. Decker, New York field office director for enforcement and removal operations, said in a statement.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order Wednesday calling for the federal government to stop providing funds to jurisdictions which don’t cooperate with immigration detainers. New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio has said he doesn’t plan to change policy following the executive order and has claimed the city has “solid ground for a legal challenge to the executive order should the occasion arise.”
New York City’s comptroller recently said that the Big Apple could lose an estimated $7 billion annually in federal funding if they do not change their “sanctuary” policy.”
Is The Trump Executive Order On Refugees Constitutional?
“Curiously, the order notes the 9-11 attacks but the order does not cover the countries that were the sources for those attackers, including Saudi Arabia and UAE. I think that this order is a mistake and contradicts our values. However, I do not agree with some of my colleagues at GW and other law schools that the order is clearly unconstitutional. Courts are not supposed to rule on the merits of such laws but their legality. I think that the existing precedent favors Trump.
First, this is not a religious ban. When it was first discussed on the campaign, it was described as a ban on Muslims. This is not a religious ban. It certainly can be opposed as having that effect but there are a wide array of Muslim countries not covered by the ban and would not be impacted by the restrictions. A court cannot in my view treat this order as carrying out a religious ban as it is currently written.
Second, the law largely suspends entry pending the creation of new vetting procedures. That is based on a national security determination made by the President. Courts have generally deferred to such judgments. A president’s authority is at its zenith on our borders. Hillary Clinton herself campaigned on carefully vetting refugees (though she favors increasing such entries). In a November 2015 national security speech at the Council on Foreign Relations, Clinton said “So yes, we do need to be vigilant in screening and vetting any refugees from Syria, guided by the best judgment of our security professionals in close coordination with our allies and partners.”
Finally, there is precedent for limited entry from particular countries going back to some of the earliest periods in this country. The earlier immigration laws include the 1875 Page Act which focused on Asian immigrants and those believes to be engaged in prostitution or considered convicts in their native countries. Then there was the infamous 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act. Then there were other measures limiting immigration from particular areas like the 1906 “Gentleman’s Agreement” (Japanese aliens) and the or the 1917 Immigration Act (“Asiatic Barred Zone”).
In 1921 and 1924, Congress passed the “Quota Acts” limiting entry from disfavored countries. of nations from whom no further immigrants would be accepted. In every case, immigration policy continued to develop as a series of widening, discriminatory exclusions. It was not until 1965 that we broke from our long and troubling history is such discrimination.
However, The 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act contains section, 212(f) that gives sweeping authority on the exclusion of certain aliens:
Whenever the President finds that the entry of any aliens or of any class of aliens into the United States would be detrimental to the interests of the United States, he may by proclamation, and for such period as he shall deem necessary, suspend the entry of all aliens or any class of aliens as immigrants or nonimmigrants, or impose on the entry of aliens any restrictions he may deem to be appropriate.
Even President Jimmy Carter used such authority. Executive Order 12172 involves an order to force 50,000 Iranian students living in the United States report to an immigration office and face possible deportation. Thousands were deported.”
“CAPITOL HILL | Nov 19, 2015 — Amid furor in Washington over the admission of Syrian refugees, senators of both parties say that the easiest path for foreign terrorists to enter the United States is the visa waiver program.
Without visas, nationals from dozens of countries in Europe and elsewhere need only a passport to pass through U.S. customs at airports and other entry points, bypassing the screening process to which visa applicants are subjected.
“Twenty million people each year from 38 countries, including France and Belgium, use the visa waiver program,” said Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein. “Terrorists could exploit the program, could go from France to Syria, as 2,000 fighters have done, come back to France, use the visa waiver program and, without any further scrutiny, come into the United States.”
The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Feinstein has introduced legislation to block visa waivers for foreign nationals who have traveled to Syria or Iraq in the last five years.
“They can still visit,” Feinstein said, “but they need a traditional visa – a process that includes an in-person interview at a U.S. embassy or consulate.”
The bill is co-sponsored by Republican Senator Jeff Flake, who says fears about possible security risks posed by Syrian refugees are overblown.
“If you look at all the gaps in our security situation and the vulnerabilities we have, in my view the refugee program is well down that list [of concerns]. Visa waiver is near the top,” Flake said.
“We absolutely need to tighten up the visa waiver program,” said another Republican, Rob Portman. “There are 5,000 foreign fighters who are from countries with which we have a visa waiver program. It’s a huge problem.”
Daily Mail Reporter Claims Fake Syrian Passport Fooled Expert
– Daily Mail UK
“Daily Mail reporter Nick Fagge told Fox News that he was able to get a fake Syrian passport good enough to fool a supposed “forgery expert” for just $2,000.
Fagge’s article on the experience caught the attention of Monday morning’s edition of Fox & Friends, where he appeared to discuss just how easy it apparently is to attain a Syrian passport — regardless of whether or not you’re actually a Syrian refugee. The reporter was able to obtain a passport, driving license and identity card for the price.
“When I bought the passport, I asked [the forger] who was buying them,” he said. “He told me, ‘people who wanted a better life, people who are pretending to by Syrians.’ But most worryingly, ‘members of ISIS,’ people who wanted to come to Europe to bring their evil war to us and kill people.”
Fagge later got in touch with a forgery expert in the German police. Both the driving license and the identity card were easily dismissed, but the passport was another matter.
“He spent quite a long time analyzing it. He said it was genuine. He said, ‘This is a real passport.’”
Concerns about possible ties between Syrian refugees and ISIS have been heightened following Friday’s terrorist attacks in Paris after a Syrian passport was found on one of the attackers. In the United States, several state governors have denounced the White House’s current plan to accept refugees.”
Bernie says ‘climate change’ is the cause of global terrorism
Hillary’s “smart power” will bring peace in our time – empathize with our enemies
“”Using every possible tool and partner to advance peace and security. Leaving no one on the sidelines. Showing respect even for one’s enemies. Trying to understand, in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.” – Hillary Clinton
Trump Strategist Steve Bannon Says Media Should ‘Keep Its Mouth Shut’
– New York Times
“Stephen K. Bannon, President Trump’s chief White House strategist, laced into the American press during an interview on Wednesday evening, arguing that news organizations had been “humiliated” by an election outcome few anticipated, and repeatedly describing the media as “the opposition party” of the current administration.
“The media should be embarrassed and humiliated and keep its mouth shut and just listen for awhile,” Mr. Bannon said during a telephone call.
“I want you to quote this,” Mr. Bannon added. “The media here is the opposition party. They don’t understand this country. They still do not understand why Donald Trump is the president of the United States.”
The scathing assessment — delivered by one of Mr. Trump’s most trusted and influential advisers, in the first days of his presidency — comes at a moment of high tension between the news media and the administration, with skirmishes over the size of Mr. Trump’s inaugural crowd and the president’s false claims that millions of illegal votes by undocumented immigrants swayed the popular vote against him.
During a call to discuss Sean M. Spicer, the president’s press secretary, Mr. Bannon ratcheted up the criticism, offering a broad indictment of the news media as biased against Mr. Trump and out of touch with the American public. That’s an argument familiar to readers of Breitbart and followers of Trump-friendly personalities like Sean Hannity.
“The elite media got it dead wrong, 100 percent dead wrong,” Mr. Bannon said of the election, calling it “a humiliating defeat that they will never wash away, that will always be there.”
“The mainstream media has not fired or terminated anyone associated with following our campaign,” Mr. Bannon said. “Look at the Twitter feeds of those people: they were outright activists of the Clinton campaign.”
“That’s why you have no power,” Mr. Bannon added. “You were humiliated.”
Asked if he was concerned that Mr. Spicer had lost credibility with the news media, Mr. Bannon chortled. “Are you kidding me?” he said. “We think that’s a badge of honor. ‘Questioning his integrity’ — are you kidding me? The media has zero integrity, zero intelligence, and no hard work.”
“You’re the opposition party,” Mr. Bannon said. “Not the Democratic Party. You’re the opposition party. The media’s the opposition party.”
NYT Editorial Board Horrified That Trump Wants To Fight ‘Radical Islamic Terrorism’
– Daily Caller
“The New York Times’ editorial board took a stand Thursday against President Donald Trump’s vow to eradicate radical Islamic terrorism from the face of the earth.
The Times’ editors worried that Trump’s approach to fighting radical Islamic terrorism — which they referred to with scare quotes — is “more likely to further inflame anti-American sentiment around the world than to make the United States safer.”
“The emerging details suggest that Mr. Trump’s plans to eradicate violent extremists are not only at odds with Mr. Obama’s; they trample on American values and international law,” they wrote.
The Times editorial found several problems with Trump’s approach, including his use of the term “radical Islam,” which the editors say is “demonizing and alienating the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims,” the fact that he is reportedly considering designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization, and the fact that he doesn’t plan on closing Guantanamo Bay (which Obama was unable to do despite vowing to close the prison on day one of his administration).
The editors expressed its support for Obama’s approach to fighting terrorism. Unlike Trump, Obama declined to say “radical Islamic terrorism” once during his eight years in office.
Trump has claimed the Obama administration’s politically correct approach to fighting terrorism is at least partially to blame for the slew of domestic terrorist attacks during the Obama years.”
Trump on defunding sanctuary cities: The day is over when criminal illegals can stay in our country and wreak havoc
“Great stuff from today’s speech at DHS headquarters — for both sides. For border hawks like me, Trump’s new executive orders on immigration fulfill key campaign promises — the wall, more enforcement agents, and giving the DOJ and DHS power to yank certain grants from sanctuary cities. For the left, it’s something stark to rally their base around. Eric Schneiderman, the ambitious New York Attorney General who’s investigating Trump’s charity, was out quickly this afternoon with a set of guidelines for sanctuary cities on how to resist complying with the feds.
Several mayors of sanctuary cities have already piped up to say that they won’t comply with the feds. What sort of money is on the table here? As an example, the DOJ distributed $165 million in grants to local agencies in 2015 as part of its State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. The Attorney General has discretion in deciding how that money is divvied up; if a city won’t help the feds by identifying illegals in its custody, they don’t get paid. The liberal attack line, I assume, will be that Trump is undermining his own law-and-order approach by leaving some local police forces struggling to make up the shortfall in funds. It’s on that turf that the political battle will be fought. The legal battle, of course, will be fought in court: One question, which has already been addressed by one federal circuit, is whether local police are required to hold illegals for ICE. Sessions may end up pressing that fight.
Enjoy a few minutes from today’s speech, with Trump’s rhetoric unusually forceful even by his typical standards on immigration. Note the reference to families who’ve lost relatives to crimes committed by illegals, which is of a piece with the administration’s plan to call more attention to individual crimes. Trump and his team surely realize how effective it is when they can put a human face like Kate Steinle’s to the phenomenon of violence committed by people who shouldn’t be here. The man knows media and narratives. It’s a smart way to go. One footnote in closing, though: Freezing the DACA program was not part of today’s immigration measures. The whole point of Trump’s message here is that the White House is ready to go all-in on removing criminals — and, by implication, not the otherwise law-abiding kids and college students who were brought here illegally by their parents as children. Paul Ryan went so far as to tell DREAMers in an interview tonight not to worry about their status. Stay tuned.”
Trump to publicize crimes by illegal immigrants in ‘sanctuary cities’
– New York Post
“President Trump plans to publish a weekly list of crimes committed by illegal immigrants in the Big Apple and all other sanctuary cities that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
The list will inform citizens and others about “public safety threats associated with sanctuary” cities, according to an executive order Trump signed Wednesday.
“The [Homeland Security] Secretary shall utilize the Declined Detainer Outcome Report or its equivalent and, on a weekly basis, make public a comprehensive list of criminal actions committed by aliens and any jurisdiction that ignored or otherwise failed to honor any detainers with respect to such aliens,” the order said.
Mayor de Blasio said that New York — one of about 300 sanctuary cities across the US — would not change it’s policy in the face of Trump’s threat to withhold federal funding from cities that do not play ball with his order.
The NYPD said Wednesday the city has a list of roughly 170 criminal offenses that are not covered by the sanctuary policy, and that the department notifies the feds when illegal immigrants are charged with those crimes.
The list includes serious crimes such as felony assault, rape, murder and terrorism as well as gun smuggling and witness tampering.”
Explosive Language: Call the New York Bombing Terrorism Already
“Unlike the powers-that-be charged with running New York City, you and I can be realistic. Intentionally placing two live bombs set to explode and intended to commit mass murder in a populated center of the most recognized city in the United States is terror. It does not matter if the perpetrator is part of a group or a lone wolf; it doesn’t matter if you are fighting for Islam or animal rights or if you are an anarchist. The definition is plain and simple. Using violence or the threat of violence to achieve a political end is terror.
The only time it is not called terror is when you want to keep the masses calm. Then you rely on antiquated definitions by the FBI and Justice Department. But those days are long gone.
When the bomb injuring dozens of people exploded in Chelsea on Saturday night and a second unexploded bomb was discovered a few blocks away, New York City’s Mayor De Blasio said it was “intentional,” but he added, “there is no evidence at this point that there is a terror connection.” He also said that “there was no credible specific threat to New York.”
Our democratically elected leaders insist on hanging on to the misconception that it is not terror if the perpetrators are not part of an organized, recognized, terror group. And in New York City right now, they are sticking to that story.
Lone wolves or small groups by their nature do not communicate with a central command, and they are difficult to detect and monitor. ISIS and Al Qaeda know this all too well. That’s why they have repeatedly said that they no longer want recruits to travel to Syria and Iraq to fight. ISIS and Al Qaeda say that followers will be more effective if they attack in their homeland. And their message is being heard. It has been the model in Europe and now in the United States.
Our leaders want to package terrorists into nice neat boxes. So they conclude that if a terrorist is not a member of a terror group the violent act they perpetrate is not considered terror. The obvious example is the terror at Fort Hood, officially classified as workplace violence.
Even more poignant is the Orlando terrorist. The perpetrator was actually on the phone with local media bragging that he was part of ISIS and explaining that his actions were motivated by a need to defend Islam. He even repeatedly chanted the Islamic terrorist battle cry: “Allahu Akbar.” Yet, the U.S. Attorney General still responded by saying, “We may never really know the motivation behind the attack.”
You Can’t Win The War Until You Identify The Enemy
“Israel has been dealing with terrorist attacks since the country was founded. They identify the bombings, shootings, etc. as terrorist attacks, pride themselves on being able to clean up anything in two hours or less, and continue on their way. Somehow America has not mastered these basic skills that unfortunately are necessary in the world we currently live in.
Over the weekend there was a stabbing in a mall in St. Cloud, Minnesota, on Saturday, a bombing in Seaside, New Jersey, on Saturday morning during a 5K Marine charity race, and two bombs in New York City on Saturday night–one exploded and one did not. The device in New Jersey was described as three pipe bombs; the devices in New York City have been described as pressure cookers with timers.
Houston, we have a problem. Part of the problem is that terrorism has come to America, and part of the problem is that our political leaders are reluctant to admit that terrorism has come to America…..
If you are a regular reader of this website, you are familiar with the information in the following paragraph. If you are not a regular reader, this is something you need to be aware of:
In October 2011, elements of the American Muslim Brotherhood wrote the White House demanding an embargo or discontinuation of information and materials relating to Islamic-based terrorism. The letter was addressed to John Brennan, who at the time was Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism. Days later John Brennan agreed to create a task force to address the problem by removing personnel and products that the Muslim Brotherhood deemed “biased, false, and highly offensive.”
This move in effect allowed the Muslim Brotherhood to control the information given to the people charged with stopping the terrorism initiated by groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. At this point, the 9/11 reports and other actual historic documents were altered to make them compliant with the new paradigm. (I thought only the Russians rewrote history.)
If we are not careful, political correctness is going to kill us all. The weekend attacks were terrorism–whether by a lone nutcase who thought he represented Allah or a member of a group. It really doesn’t matter–people were injured as a result of the actions of these people.
CAIR (which is one of the major Muslim Brotherhood front groups in America–see the list of unindicted co-conspirators from the Holy Land Foundation Trial) works very hard to keep the Muslim community from reporting suspicious behavior and to keep our government unaware of what is being taught in some mosques.
It is time to pay attention to the people among us who have refused to assimilate and who are fighting to undermine our way of life. That group of people does not include all Muslims, but it does mainly consist of Muslims, and until peaceful Muslims rein in the radicals among them, we need to watch the entire community. Refusing to call a terrorist attack a terrorist attack does not help anyone; and in fact, it simply emboldens those planning more attacks.”
Obama’s Scrub of Muslim terms under question; common links in attacks
– Washington Times | 2013
The White House issued an edict to scrub all law enforcement, intelligence and military instruction on Islam and Islamic Terror
“Before the Boston Marathon bombings, the Obama administration argued for years that there is a big difference between terrorists and the tenets of Islam.
A senior White House aide in 2009 publicly urged Washington to cease using the term “jihadist” — asserting that terrorists are simply extremists. Two years later, the White House ordered a cleansing of training materials that Islamic groups deemed offensive.
Now, some analysts are asking whether the 2009 edict and others that followed have dampened law enforcement’s appetite to thoroughly investigate terrorism suspects for fear of offending higher-ups or the American Muslim lobby.
It is not just the case of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, a radicalized jihadist whom the FBI questioned in 2011 and cleared of terrorism links. At least five Muslims have attempted mass destruction in the U.S. since 2009, undetected beforehand by law enforcement and the intelligence community:
Steven Emerson runs the Investigative Project on Terrorism, which monitors a network of Islamic groups with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, whose stated goal is to impose Shariah, or Islamic law, on the world.
“Numerous experts on Islamic terrorism like myself and I had given 143 lectures at the FBI, CIA were banned from speaking to any U.S. government counterterrorism conferences,” Mr. Emerson told The Washington Times. “Instead, these agencies were ordered to invite Muslim Brotherhood front groups.”
The biggest White House push to tone down training on jihadists emerged in 2011, the same year the Russian government warned the U.S. about Tamerlan Tsarnaev, whose parents hailed from Chechnya, a hotbed of radical Islamists. Tamerlan and younger brother Dzhokhar Tsarnaev are accused of placing the two bombs that killed three and wounded more than 260 at the Boston Marathon.
In October 2011, 57 Islamic groups wrote a letter to John O. Brennan, now CIA director, but then President Obama’s chief counterterrorism adviser.
Citing news reports, the groups complained of “biased, false and highly offensive training materials about Muslims and Islam” inside the federal government’s instructional halls.
“While recent news reports have highlighted the FBI’s use of biased experts and training materials, we have learned that this problem extends far beyond the FBI and has infected other government agencies, including the U.S. Attorney’s Anti-Terrorism Advisory Councils, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and the U.S. Army,” the letter read.
Muslims objected to several training guides, such as a 2009 report produced at the Army Command and General Staff at the Fort Leavenworth School of Advanced Military Studies.
“Moderate Muslims are not exercising moderation; they are simply applying other means to accomplish the same goal of establishing global Islamic dominance,” it quoted the report as saying.
At least two of the 57 groups were listed by the Justice Department as unindicted co-conspirators and as being connected to the Muslim Brotherhood in the prosecution of a Texas charity for funding Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization. The groups are the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America.
The organizations’ letter demanded that biased trainers be disciplined, that all instructors undergo retraining and that materials deemed offensive by Muslim activists be purged.
The White House issued an edict to scrub all law enforcement, intelligence and military teachings on Islam. The FBI ended up discarding pages of information that warned about the threat from the Brotherhood.”
History of the Muslim Brotherhood Penetration of the U.S. Government
“Given the long history of Muslim Brotherhood activity in this country, its declared objective to “destroy the Western civilization from within,” and the extensive evidence of successful influence operations at the highest levels of the U.S. government, it is urgent that we recognize this clear and present danger that threatens not only our Republic but the values of Western civilization.
This report describes how the Muslim Brotherhood infiltrated and suborned the U.S. government to actively assist, whether knowingly or not, the mission of its grand jihad. Its hard-won position at the forefront of the 21st century Islamic Awakening is possible only because of decades of patient infiltration and political indoctrination (Da’wa) in the West, and especially the United States of America, even as the grassroots work of building an organizational structure advanced steadily in the land of its origin as well. It is important to recognize the sophistication of the Brotherhood’s international strategy and how the takedown of U.S. national security defenses from within was critical to the current Middle East-North Africa (MENA) campaign to re-establish the Caliphate and enforce Islamic Law (shariah).”