For those of us who’ve been raising alarms about both the jihadist threat and the national-security vulnerability created by the Obama administration’s non-enforcement of the immigration laws, this is not a surprise — particularly less than two weeks before September 11. But it is nonetheless jarring to read. Judicial Watch has just put out this statement:
Islamic terrorist groups are operating in the Mexican border city of Ciudad Juarez and planning to attack the United States with car bombs or other vehicle born improvised explosive devices (VBIED). High-level federal law enforcement, intelligence and other sources have confirmed to Judicial Watch that a warning bulletin for an imminent terrorist attack on the border has been issued. Agents across a number of Homeland Security, Justice and Defense agencies have all been placed on alert and instructed to aggressively work all possible leads and sources concerning this imminent terrorist threat.
Specifically, Judicial Watch sources reveal that the militant group Islamic State of Iraq and Greater Syria (ISIS) is confirmed to now be operating in Juarez, a famously crime-infested narcotics hotbed situated across from El Paso, Texas. Violent crimes are so rampant in Juarez that the U.S. State Department has issued a number of travel warnings for anyone planning to go there. The last one was issued just a few days ago.
Intelligence officials have picked up radio talk and chatter indicating that the terrorist groups are going to “carry out an attack on the border,” according to one JW source. “It’s coming very soon,” according to this high-level source, who clearly identified the groups planning the plots as “ISIS and Al Qaeda.” An attack is so imminent that the commanding general at Ft. Bliss, the U.S. Army post in El Paso, is being briefed, another source confirms. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) did not respond to multiple inquiries from Judicial Watch, both telephonic and in writing, about this information.
The disturbing inside intelligence comes on the heels of news reports revealing that U.S. intelligence has picked up increased chatter among Islamist terror networks approaching the 13th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. While these terrorists reportedly plan their attack just outside the U.S., President Obama admits that “we don’t have a strategy yet” to combat ISIS. “I don’t want to put the cart before the horse,” the commander-in-chief said this week during a White House press briefing. “I think what I’ve seen in some of the news reports suggest that folks are getting a little further ahead of what we’re at than what we currently are.”
The administration has also covered up, or at the very least downplayed, a serious epidemic of crime along the Mexican border even as heavily armed drug cartels have taken over portions of the region. Judicial Watch has reported that the U.S. Border Patrol actually ordered officers to avoid the most crime-infested stretches because they’re “too dangerous” and patrolling them could result in an “international incident” of cross border shooting. In the meantime, who could forget the famous words of Obama’s first Homeland Security Secretary, Janet Napolitano; the southern border is “as secure as it has ever been.”
These new revelations are bound to impact the current debate about the border crisis and immigration policy.
On Thursday President Obama held a major press conference to deal with the subjects of Russian aggression and the response to ISIS threats on America.
President Obama gave first “dibs” to NBC’s Chuck Todd, who will soon be helming the NBC flagship program Meet the Press; the President took the opportunity to congratulate him on his recent promotion.
Todd asked a multipart question and a follow up:
Let me start with Syria, the decision that you have to make between — first of all, is it a if or when situation about going after ISIL in Syria? Can you defeat ISIL or ISIS without going after them in Syria?
And then how do you prioritize? You’ve said that Assad has lost legitimacy to lead. Defeating ISIS could help Assad keep power. Talk about how you prioritize those two pieces of your foreign policy?
The follow up:
Do you need Congress’s approval to go into Syria?
The entire answer is worth reviewing, but I won’t to focus in on what has become the most controversial and terrifying portion of the President’s response. It came as he answered Todd’s follow up question.
Here is what President Obama said in response to Todd’s question on Congressional approval in Syria.
You know, I have consulted with Congress throughout this process. I am confident that as commander in chief I have the authorities to engage in the acts that we are conducting currently. As our strategy develops, we will continue to consult with Congress, and I do think that it’ll be important for Congress to weigh in and we’re — that our consultations with Congress continue to develop so that the American people are part of the debate.
But I don’t want to put the cart before the horse. We don’t have a strategy yet. I think what I’ve seen in some of the news reports suggests that folks are getting a little further ahead of where we’re at than we currently are. And I think that’s not just my assessment, but the assessment of our military, as well. We need to make sure that we’ve got clear plans, that we’re developing them. At that point, I will consult with Congress and make sure that their voices are heard.
But there’s no point in me asking for action on the part of Congress before I know exactly what it is that is going to be required for us to get the job done.
This admission from the White House is horrifying. How can there possibly be no strategy for dealing with ISIS yet?
Here is Fox News’ Ed Henry to explain just how big of a deal the President’s admission really is.
We have reason to be worried, folks. Earlier yesterday a man was arrested waving an ISIS flag in Chicago after making bomb threats, and we’ve already documented the other ISIS threats that have recently been uttered against our nation. ISIS is preparing and we better be too. I hope that the Obama administration can get their act together soon and put a strategy in place… otherwise we are in big trouble.
Read more at http://eaglerising.com/8294/breaking-news-obama-admits-dont-strategy-yet-isis/#eXcdYBKZFzDQLI6b.99
At the height of the financial crisis in 2008, the U.S. government forced some of the countries largest banks to take “bailout” funds amounting to billions of dollars in order to keep them from going bankrupt. It was a move designed to not only keep too-big-to-fail financial institutions afloat, but one that would inspire confidence and keep American consumers spending. As a result, the last several years have seen stock markets reach record highs with Americans continuing to rack up personal debt for real estate, vehicles, education, and consumer goods as if the financial crisis never happened.
But the purported recovery may not be everything that government officials and influential financial leaders have made it out to be.
Recent comments delivered by Federal Reserve Vice Chairman Stanley Fischer suggest that not only are global and domestic economies still struggling, but the U.S. government itself is preparing financial contingency plans in anticipation of another widespread economic event.
However, this time around, according to Fischer, the government won’t be bailing out financial institutions in need of cash. Instead, failing banks will turn directly to their unsecured creditors when they need money. And within this context, that means you.
The recession that began in the United States in December 2007 ended in June 2009. But the Great Recession is a near-worldwide phenomenon, with the consequences of which many advanced economies continue to struggle. Its depth and breadth appear to have changed the economic environment in many ways and to have left the road ahead unclear.
Work on the use of the resolution mechanisms set out in the Dodd-Frank Act, based on the principle of a single point of entry–though less advanced than the work on capital and liquidity ratios–holds the promise of making it possible to resolve banks in difficulty at no direct cost to the taxpayer.
As part of this approach, the United States is preparing a proposal to require systemically important banks to issue bail-inable, long-term debt that will enable insolvent banks to recapitalize themselves in resolution without calling on government funding–this cushion is known as a “gone concern” buffer.
Though Fischer doesn’t detail exactly what “bail-inable long-term debt” actually is, one only needs to look to Europe, namely Cyprus, to understand what he means.
When the Cypriot banking system collapsed because of an inability to service its debt in 2013, the government forced bank depositors to cover the debts. This led to banks forcibly seizing funds from depositor accounts in order to pay their debts.
According to the Fed Vice Chairman, the U.S. government is now proposing similar rules, following in the footsteps of Europe and Japan, who have already prepared such measures.
The bottom line is that financial, economic and monetary policymakers in the United States are fearful that another crisis, perhaps even worse than what we saw in 2008, is going to be playing out in the very near future. Otherwise, why would they find it necessary to take the drastic step of forcing bank depositors to act as a backstop for their financial institutions?
But this time around, it won’t be the government that bails them out directly. Instead, if you have an account with the bank, you are an unsecured creditor for that institution, just like the people of Cyprus were for their banks. And when that bank inevitably comes under pressure because of an inability to cover their debts, it is you who will become the bailout mechanism.
It’s not hard to imagine how this scenario might play out the next time around.
At the first hint of another crisis we’re going to see panic that will make 2008 look like a picnic. First, stock markets will sell off en masse across the world as a scramble to not be the last one outtakes hold of investors. This, in turn, will lead to liquidity problems at major financial institution across the country. As banks run out of cash to cover the tens of billions of dollars they need to service their existing debt, they will turn to the new policies described by Stanley Fischer.
What this means is that one morning you could wake up and see ten or twenty percent of your funds transferred out of your account and exchanged for long-term debt (like a bond) with the promise that the bank will pay it back to you at a later date.
The immediate result, as you might expect, will be widespread bank runs, just as we saw in Europe when Cypriot depositors got hit. But, there will be no cash to be had save a few hundred dollars here and there, as banks will limit ATM withdrawals and will likely shut their doors to customers.
This, of course, would have an effect similar to what we recently saw in Ferguson, except riots and looting will be taking place in every major city across the country.
And though it may seem like an impossible scenario to envision in today’s peaceful and stable America, the U.S. military and Department of Homeland Security doesn’t think so. For the last several years, they have been war-gaming and simulating widespread economic collapse scenarios, and they’ve been stockpiling everything from armored vehicles to riot gear in over 8,000 counties across the United States in preparation for the civil unrest that would explode from coast to coast.
Tess Pennington, author of The Prepper’s Blueprint, warns that when a crisis like this hits and people lose everything they have, “a person’s anger rules their actions and their thoughts.” When that anger takes over, the people will turn on each other and on their government. “They defy government, because the government is the one that took those freedoms and rights away.”
The government knows this and they have prepared significant contingency plans for such an event.
When it happens, it will be too late for those who did not have the foresight to prepare for it.
Do you have extra cash on hand in case the banks shut down?
Have you acquired a secondary mechanism of exchange, such as gold or silver, in case your funds become inaccessible?
“The fact is, we may even see, on 9/11/14, MH-370 resurface again. We should be prepared for anything. We should go to DEFCON-1, which is our highest state of readiness, and be prepared as we lead up to 9/11.” -Ret. Lt. Gen. Thomas G. McInerney
McInerney also claims that on the 7th of September a “major news network” and a “major publishing network” are going to release an “earth shattering” book.
It could be nothing, it could be real intelligence or, Heaven help us, it could be a planned false flag. It does not matter. There is the potential that something real could be about to happen, no matter who may be planning it.
You don’t have to look at any conspiracy angles at all. Just understand this… The government may have very well created ISIS. They might even control ISIS. But they did not create Islam and these radical Islamists are quite unpredictable. So even if you believe that our government created them, you can’t possibly underestimate the forces of the Islamic State (ISIS) or any other terrorist organization.
Though the likely result of a terrorist attack on the homeland would be devastatingly tragic, it might be curiously interesting to see how all of these stories start falling into place – like pieces in one large puzzle.
Dallas, TX - -(Ammoland.com)- Last week, I built a case for how the Islamic State’s monstrous brutalities include the summary killing of men, women and children, including by crucifixion.
That was before the world heard of the beheading of courageous U.S. journalist James Foley, which demonstrated just how psychotic and cruel the Islamic State is.
Today I will build further on the Islamic State’s horrors and crimes against humanity and then conclude by explaining why President Barack Obama’s laissez-faire mentality toward U.S. enemies is not only emboldening them but also drawing the U.S. closer and closer to another world war.
Reuters reported last week, “Refugee Samo Ilyas Ali has nine children to feed but he can’t focus on the future because the sounds of women and children crying out for help while being buried alive by Islamic State militants in northern Iraq often consume his mind.”
Just two weeks ago, Islamic State terrorists came in the night with machine guns and began to dig ditches for mass graves in Ali’s village. A tearful Ali, who is a 46-year-old former grocer, explained:
“We did not understand. Then they started to put people in those holes. Those people were alive. After a while we heard gunfire. I can’t forget that scene. Women, children, crying for help. We had to run for our lives. There was nothing to be done for them.”
If you still believe that the Islamic State wouldn’t brutally murder children in cold blood, consider a recent Anglican Communion News Service report. An emotionally distraught chaplain and Canon Andrew White explained that the 5-year-old son of a founder of Baghdad’s Anglican church was “cut in half during an attack by the Islamic State.”
White explained: “I’m almost in tears because I’ve just had somebody in my room whose little child was cut in half. I baptized his child in my church in Baghdad. This little boy, they named him after me. He was called Andrew.”
Do routine beheadings really seemed far-fetched — of even children — for such a barbaric group as the Islamic State? Or do we somehow expect this extreme terrorist group among extreme terrorist groups to spare children and send them all to an orphanage, only to see them grow up and be the group’s archenemies?
No wonder a large number of Christians fled the northern city of Mosul after the Islamic State’s message — convert to Islam, get out or be killed — was broadcast by loudspeakers from the city’s mosques. The Islamic State’s leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, said that for Christians who don’t convert or leave, “the only option is the sword.”
Special advisers for the United Nations explained: “These reports are shocking in the extreme. They show, in very clear terms, the complete absence of humanity of the perpetrators of these crimes.” They are grave violations of human rights and international humanitarian law.
Yonadam Kanna, Iraq’s most prominent Christian politician, said:
“This is ethnic cleansing, but nobody is speaking up.” There’s even a more appropriate word for it: genocide. And no one is speaking up?
Kanna’s words bring me back to Edmund Burke’s words: “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
If you think Obama’s duck-and-dodge, in-and-out, out-of-sight and out-of-mind “don’t do stupid stuff” war strategy is going to make the Islamic State dissipate and disappear, think again.
Consider the words of Adam Taylor, foreign affairs reporter for The Washington Post. He described the growth of the Islamic State radicals as already;
“worryingly global. (Its) distinctive black-and-white flag was flown in London last week, and leaflets supporting it were handed out in the city’s Oxford Street on Tuesday. An American was arrested at a New York City airport this month after authorities were tipped off by his pro-Islamic State Twitter rants. The group has began publishing videos in Hindi, Urdu and Tamil in a bid to reach Indian Muslims. There are credible reports that the group is hoping to target Asian countries — and Indonesia is so worried that it banned all support for the Islamic State.”
This isn’t fear-mongering. It’s the global reality of the war on terror — not an “overseas contingency operation” as Obama calls it.