The US Government Has An Internet Killswitch — And It’s None Of Your Business

By Derrick Broze

On Monday the Supreme Court declined to hear a petition from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) that sought to force the Department of Homeland Security to release details of a secret “killswitch” protocol to shut down cellphone and Internet service during emergencies.

EPIC has been fighting since 2011 to release the details of the program, which is known as Standard Operating Procedure 303. EPIC writes, “On March 9, 2006, the National Communications System (‘NCS’) approved SOP 303, however it was never released to the public. This secret document codifies a ‘shutdown and restoration process for use by commercial and private wireless networks during national crisis.’”

EPIC continues, “In a 2006-2007 Report, the President’s National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee (‘NSTAC’) indicated that SOP 303 would be implemented under the coordination of the National Coordinating Center (‘NCC’) of the NSTAC, while the decision to shut down service would be made by state Homeland Security Advisors or individuals at DHS. The report indicates that NCC will determine if a shutdown is necessary based on a ‘series of questions.’”

Despite EPIC’s defeat at the hands of the Supreme Court, the four-year court battle yielded aheavily redacted copy of Standard Operating Procedure 303.

The fight for transparency regarding SOP 303 began shortly after a Bay Area Rapid Transit (“BART”) officer in San Francisco shot and killed a homeless man named Charles Hill on July 3, 2011. The shooting sparked massive protests against BART throughout July and August 2011. During one of these protests, BART officials cut off cell phone service inside four transit stations for three hours. This kept anyone on the station platform from sending or receiving phone calls, messages, or other data.

In July 2012, EPIC submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to the DHS seeking the full text of Standard Operating Procedure 303; the full text of the predetermined “series of questions” that determines if a shutdown is necessary; and any executing protocols related to the implementation of Standard Operating Procedure 303, distributed to DHS, other federal agencies, or private companies.

After the DHS fought the FOIA releases, a district court in Washington, D.C. ruled in EPIC’s favor, but that ruling was later overturned by the court of appeals. The appeals court told EPIC the government was free to withhold details of the plan under the Freedom of Information Act because the information might “endanger” the public.  In 2015, the digital rights group asked the Supreme Court to review the ruling by the federal appeals court.

With the Supreme Court’s refusal to address EPIC’s petition, the issue seems to have reached a dead-end. The American people are (once again) left in the dark regarding the inner-workings of another dangerous and intrusive government program. It is only through the hard work of activists and groups like EPIC that we are at least aware of the existence of this program — but knowing bits and pieces about the protocol is not enough. In order to combat such heavy-handed measures, we need to have access to the government’s own documents. Hopefully, there is already a whistleblower preparing to release these details.

What we do with the information we do have is up to each of us as individuals. We can sit back and watch the United States further devolve into a militarized police and surveillance state — or we can spread this information, get involved locally, and create new systems outside of the current paradigm of control and exploitation.

This article (The US Government Has an Internet Killswitch — and It’s None of Your Business) is free and open source. You have permission to republish this article under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Derrick Broze and theAntiMedia.org. Anti-Media Radio airs weeknights at 11pm Eastern/8pm Pacific. Image credit: Tmthetom.

HOUSE MOVES TO APPROVE FIRST FEDERAL SHARIA LAW IN AMERICA!

Congress is back in session and the Democrats have introduced a first-of-its-kind 

resolution to begin imposing Sharia law in the United States.

You read that correctly.

The resolution is entitled, "Condemning violence, bigotry and hateful rhetoric towards 

Muslims in the United States" and you can read it HERE.

Normally we would not worry about a resolution proposed by the Democrats but in 

this case two of the most powerful Republicans in the House are supporting this 

Sharia law resolution behind the scenes.

If this resolution passes it can later be reintroduced as binding legislation and become the law of the land -- and it would then be a crime for you, me or anyone else in America to speak truthfully about Islam!

In addition to urging Attorney General Loretta Lynch to prosecute SPEECH that is critical of Islam, the resolution also hints at imposing Islamic dress codes in American workplaces... meaning head-to-toe burqas on all female employees!

You must contact the House Judiciary Committee or contact them on their FACEBOOK PAGE (like I did!) today and tell them to reject this resolution if you don't want your 1st Amendment right to free speech to be suppressed!

In Muslim countries under Sharia law it is a crime for anyone to make public 

statements that are critical of musselmen, their prophet Mohammad or Islam 

in general - even if those statements are true.

This resolution seeks to impose the same standards on you and me, right here 

in America.

It sets up Islam as a special protected faith in America!

It is no surprise that 73 Democrat co-sponsors are supporting Obama's work to 

"fundamentally transform" America into an Islamic country.

But here is why we are concerned this resolution will pass:

According to a reliable conservative news website, 100 Percent Fed Up, this resolution 

is quietly being backed behind the scenes by House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-WI) and the 

Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, Rep. Mike McCaul (R-TX)!

Paul states in 2 Corinthians 3:12, "Therefore, since we have such hope, we use great 

boldness of speech." The literal translation of this verse means "we use great freedom 

of speech."

Freedom of speech on religious matters is fundamental to freedom in America. This resolution is a clear violation of the First Amendment.

H.Res. 569 would put a muzzle on Christians and would set Islam apart as a special favored religion in the United States that is above all criticism - even when its followers murder our fellow citizens as they just did in San Bernardino!

This anti-freedom resolution must be defeated!

We will be working to defeat Paul Ryan in his reelection efforts this year because of his 

support for Sharia law. We urge you to oppose him too!

Please warn others about this Sharia law resolution in the House as well, by sending them 

this link:

https://PrayFor.US/160104_p4us_pp_Anti_Muslim_Speech_Resolution/

Americans Need To Hear And See The TRUE Story Of Islam, Straight From Muslims Themselves

With the regular Muslims in the video above saying that they intend to bring their Sharia law to ALL the countries where they live, including America...you need to view what their Sharia law does in the video below. Please be warned that some of you may consider this quite graphic in certain sections.

Religious Double Standards In US Schools

I have several concerning questions here.

1) Why is it that our children are prohibited from reciting the Pledge of Allegiance because it states in it: "under God", but yet in a calligraphy lesson can copy a Muslim statement of faith known as the Shahada which translates to “There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the messenger of Allah” in Arabic?

2) Why are our schools teaching about other religions but say that the major religion of this country can't be discussed because it violates the principle of church-state separation which, according to the Court, is inferred by the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? Doesn't discussing ANY religion do this?

3) Why are our schools teaching Islam/Muslim doctrine that is in opposition to our American way of life? And again, see question #2.

4) And why are our schools teaching RELIGION any way if it's not only violating the principle of church-state separation but also that is supposed to be the responsibility of parents and churches?

We need to stop our schools from teaching religious doctrine to our children. We also need to tell our schools that if certain children/parents object to their children reciting a pledge or having a moment of prayer/silence, then tell their children to not do it. But this is OUR way of life here in America and it's not up for debate that it'll be done in our schools. You don't like it, than don't participate. But don't expect us to change the way we do things just because you've moved here with a different way of life, or disagree with certain wording or have a different religious or political viewpoint. Having a moment of prayer is NOT promoting ANY particular religion/doctrine. It's just giving the children a moment to address their soulful needs.

I don't understand the religious angle because the God mentioned in our pledge doesn't state a particular God, it's just God...period. And the last time I checked, that's pretty generic and even Muslims believe in a god! If you're an atheist, then just leave out those particular words. And as far as a moment of prayer, last I knew, all religions have prayers in one form or another, so I see no problem with it since prayer in of itself is not promoting any particular religion/doctrine. And again, if you're an atheist, then don't pray. Just use this time for quiet reflection.

If your problem with the pledge is a political one, then don't participate in it, period. Also, if your reason for a moment of prayer is political because you believe that schools aren't suppose to be promoting religious doctrine (which prayer in of itself doesn't!), then don't pray during this moment. Just as stated above, use it as a moment of quiet reflection. Besides, MOST schools, instead of calling it a moment of prayer, changed it and stated it as a moment of silence, because of all the hubbub of dissent.

I'm really sick and tired of other cultures, religious beliefs/doctrines and political disagreement/dissent coming here into OUR American way of life and DEMANDING us to change it to suit them. If we Americans went over to THEIR homelands and tried doing the same thing there, they'd say "No, we won't change OUR ways. If you don't like it then leave". And that's as it should be. So why in the hell do these immigrants expect any difference from us?

If I want my children to know about other religious beliefs than what I believe in, I'LL teach them or expose them to it. If I want my children to know about different political views other than what I believe in, I'll teach them about it. This is what parents, GOOD parents, do! We teach our children that there are many flavors of life, good and bad (but mostly good!) and then explain why we feel as we do about it so that when our children grow up they are knowledgeable enough to make their own choices.

So here's my next question:
5) Since when has our government and public schools become our children's parents and since when have we, the parents gave them that job/responsibility? I know I never did!

With all this said, there is one LAST set of questions:
6) When did we Americans stop believing that our way of life, our beliefs and our rights are important and that they can be arbitrarily given away or taken away just because we are tolerant of other different religious and political viewpoints? Being tolerant of these things is one thing. But letting these differing viewpoints dictate to us and take over or change our way of life is quite another!
The statement...America, love it or leave it...definitely takes on a greater meaning now, doesn't it? Because if you can't be tolerant of OUR way of life, then why in the hell should we allow you to benefit from our good graces and tolerance and have a better life that our way of life provides?

Mainers, Urge Senator Collins To Oppose Obama's "No-Fly, No Guns" List

^^^CLICK ON GRAPHIC TO SIGN PETITION^^^

Myth And Reality Of The Vaccination Campaigns

We Don't Vaccinate - Myth and Reality of the Vaccination Campaigns (Full-HD) 
from WIN - Wir Impfen Nicht! on Vimeo.

A comprehensive protection from dangerous diseases? Vaccinations are classed as the best protection that modern medicine has to offer. But there is increasing proof and indications that show that the dangers from which the vaccinations are supposed to protect us from, are totally disproportionate to the vaccines side effects.

This is particularly noticeable in children. In Germany for example, the number of vaccine doses within the first year of life has risen from 6 to 34 since 1976! Parallel to this, the number of chronic illnesses in children exploded. Amongst those are: rheumatism and cancer, but mainly allergies, susceptibility to infections and behavior manifestations such as AD(H)D. The cause of this is the additional substances in vaccines, mainly aluminium compounds. In proportion to body weight, the vaccines for babies contain 23 times as much aluminium as a vaccine for adults!

"We Don’t Vaccinate” is a sensitive, expressive and discerning documentary. Rivetingly factual, it stays solely on the vaccine track tackling the contemporary vaccine issue like no other film before it. It deserves a widespread worldwide audience.“

Eileen Dannemann, Director, National Coalition of Organized Women

OBAMA’S NO-FLY, NO-BUY VIOLATES 2ND AND 5TH AMENDMENTS

LIST USES “SECRET CRITERIA” TO BAR GUNS

December 9, 2015 Jason Richards

Reactionary gun control efforts following San Bernardino are combining undue hysteria over firearms and terrorism into one mis-aimed issue that stands to trample upon the American people – who are already the most surveilled and controlled.

Led by fear, most are prepared to sacrifice liberty and accept further measures in order to address the perceived threat from ISIS… but the bigger threat by far comes from the federal governmentitself.

The Washington Post blasted President Obama’s proposals for adding terror watch list suspects to the no-buy gun list:

The no-fly list is a secret list that uses secret criteria to determine who finds a home on it. So if you link banning guns to the no-fly list, the scenario presented is completely feasible: The government could theoretically add anyone it wants to the no-fly list, even broad categories of people, and thereby prevent them from owning a gun.

Tim Sparapani is now principal of SPQR Strategies but was formerly senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union. In that role, he became intimately familiar with the use of the no-fly list — or, anyway, as familiar as someone from outside of the government can be. Armed with that knowledge, he explained why using it as the basis for much of anything was iffy, much less banning gun purchases.

The problems are foreseeable and obvious:

“The problem with any kind of watch list,” Sparapani said, “is that it’s always going to be both under- and over-inclusive. It suffers on both accounts. It causes so many problems that it really leads us to question the worth of having a list like this.”

Not only can the draconian government database not protect everyone by knowing all the risks, but the government has carte blanche to label anyone as a potential terrorists, a threat, or simply flag the for further monitoring.

Obama’s proposal has been voiced before, including by his former White House Chief of Staff and the controversial embattled mayor of Chicago, Rahm Emanuel:

Even with the best intentions with a dangerous tool under one administration, there is every chance that the next administration would try to corral other groups under the label and deny them rights.

With Obama’s far-reaching gun control agenda, such a list could be a fail-proof method of taking everyone’s legal right to bear arms, at least at its extreme.

HOW TO BAN GUNS Step 1: People on no-fly list can’t buy guns. Step 2: Everyone goes on no-fly list. — Philip Bump (@pbump) December 7, 2015

If the IRS were running the watchlist, they would likely fail at spotting terrorists, but every Tea Party conservative might find their closely guarded 2nd Amendment under attack.

It also violates 5th Amendment rights to due process, as the Washington Post notes:

Particularly when applied to the ability to own a firearm, many would argue that the no-fly list is a violation of the 5th Amendment, which guarantees the right to due process before people are deprived of life, liberty or property. During the ACLU’s lawsuit, the government admitted that people are added to the list speculatively, before they’ve actually done anything wrong. What’s more, the Guardian reported in 2014 that the list might be used by law enforcement as a pressure point against possible informants.

The list is itself almost necessarily a slippery slope. “There’s very little incentive for any particular government official to narrow the list,” Sparapani said. “It’s much easier to put more and more names on it.”

[…]

“Who are these people who are so dangerous that we can’t let them on planes, but we haven’t gone out and arrested them?” Sparapani asked. “At what point do we actually take action against them if they’re under what we think of as passive surveillance? … If they’re too dangerous to be put on a plane but not too dangerous for us to arrest them, what exactly is this list about?”

Asked another way: Who is too dangerous to be on a plane but not dangerous enough to walk around in public — and should that person be denied the right to own a firearm because they land somewhere in that gray space? President Obama’s goal was not really to keep the guns out of the hands of possible terrorists, in part because the overlap of the no-fly list and possible terrorists looks more like a Venn diagram than a circle. It was, instead, part of his effort to limit the availability of guns in general, using the no-fly list as a tool.

Someone like Trump might start with Muslims he fears threaten America, but might end up with the very dissenters who elected him to office. Just being added to the list would be enough to harass, inconvenience and violate every civil liberty that Americans once held hear – and practically no one has ever gotten off the terrorism watch list, despite many well known mix-ups and mistakes.

As Sen. Rand Paul noted, “someone who has guns, ammunition, seven days of food” could be considered a potential terrorist under Homeland Security policy. Not only could it happen, but someone could be barred from buying guns for owning guns in the first place. It all depends on the selective enforcement and abuse of the system.

Since the Bush Administration, hundreds of people have been falsely added to the terror list or prevented from flying because they share a last name, or a similar name, with another person who is merely suspected, but not actually accused of wrongdoing.

The Washington Times reports:

“It’s very, very common for individuals who have similar appearing names to be confused with people who are actually on the no-fly list,” said Barry Steinhardt, a New York-based lawyer who heads the American Civil Liberties Union’s Technology and Liberty Program.

“The lists are both so shrouded in secrecy and so large that inevitably innocent people are swept up as potential suspects or terrorists especially when you have lists that are maintained by intelligence agencies that have very little oversight,” he said.

The Bush administration has attempted to stem confusion caused by the existence of multiple watch lists by establishing a joint FBI-CIA Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC), which consolidates more than a dozen previous lists, including the State Department’s TIPOFF database of more than 110,000 known and suspected terrorists.

Could it really happen here?

Obama seems bound and determined to undermine the 2nd Amendment in any and all ways he possibly can.

Source: http://www.shtfplan.com

The Right To Bear Arms Isn’t Up For Debate

Charles C. W. Cooke is a staff writer at National Review and the author of “The Conservatarian Manifesto.”

When debating the wisdom of the Constitution’s Second Amendment, the media tends to start from the presumption that the question is purely scientific, and that the answers can — and should — be derived from statistical analyses and relentless experimentation. This approach is mistaken. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is not the product of the latest research fads or exquisitely tortured “data journalism,” but a natural extension of the Lockean principles on which this country was founded. It must be protected as such.

The Declaration of Independence presumes that all men enjoy certain inalienable rights, among them “life” and “liberty.” Practically speaking, at both the state level (as a bulwark against tyranny) and at the individual level (as a means by which to protect oneself), this necessitates the auxiliary right to the private ownership of “arms,” which, in the common law that preceded the Second Amendment, was understood to include personal weapons that could be wielded by an individual — such as the “musket and bayonet”; “sabre, holster pistols, and carbine”; and sundry “side arms.”

At the time of the American founding, it was widely understood that there was a real danger in a government’s attempting to deprive the people of what Alexander Hamilton called their “original right of self-defense.” This is why, when it came to writing the Constitution, the anti-Federalists, who feared the government’s potential to become corrupt, refused to sign on to a more powerful national government until they had been promised certain explicit protections. Then, as now, their logic was clear: It makes no sense to allow the representatives of a free people to disarm their masters.

Americans NEED To Know...22 Islamic Training Camps HERE In America!

Scattered across the United States, rarely publicized by the "mainstream" news media, are three dozen Islamic terrorist training compounds. Under the leadership of a radical Pakistani cleric, Sheikh Mubarak Gilani, his U.S.-based group called "Muslims of the Americas" has thousands of devoted followers who, claims the documentary, are being groomed for "Homegrown Jihad."

They have a training tape in which American Muslims are recruited to "join one of the most advanced training courses in Islamic military warfare" ... right here in America! They are called "Soldiers of Allah" and they are trained in explosives, kidnapping, murder, firing weapons and guerilla warfare, says the filmmakers. And they are told, "Act like you are a friend, then kill him just like from the book."

Declassified FBI documents confirmed the existence of one such Islamic jihadist enclave in Texas, part of the same U.S.-based network of training camps, and identified by the Department of Homeland Security as connected to a terrorist organization. The Texas enclave belongs to Muslims of the Americas, which is linked to the Pakistani-based militant group Jamaat al-Fuqra, according to an investigation by the Clarion Project and ACT! For America Houston.

Jamaat al-Fuqra was founded in New York in 1980 by Gilani, who at one time was in Pakistani custody in connection with the abduction of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl. Pearl was later beheaded by Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, whom the "9/11 Commission Report" identified as "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks."

"Muslims of the Americas" claims it has a network of 22 “villages” around the U.S., with headquarters at an encampment in the Catskill Mountains near Hancock, N.Y., called Holy Islamberg, as WND has reported. An investigative report at the time found neighbors of Islamberg were deeply concerned about military-style training taking place there and frustrated by an apparent lack of attention from federal authorities. Jamaat al-Fuqra has collaborated with major terrorist organizations, including Hezbollah and al-Qaida.


The FBI describes the compound in Texas, called Mahmoudberg, as an “enclave” and “communal living site.” Located in Brazoria County along County Road 3 near Sweeny, Texas, it was discovered by the FBI through a tip from an informant in New York, according to the Clarion Project.

The Texas commune, in a heavily wooded area, is estimated by a local resident who spoke to ACT researchers to encompass about 25 acres. It dates back to the late 1980s, the resident said, which is confirmed by the FBI documents.

The FBI reported in 2007 that one commune resident formerly was a leader at the Muslims of the Americas compound in Badger, Calif., called Baladullah. In March 2001, a Baladullah member had been arrested for transporting guns between New York and South Carolina. Another was charged with murdering a police deputy that caught him breaking and entering a home. The declassified FBI documents show that the enclave is not the only affiliate of the organization that has operated in the state.

A 2003 FBI report states that investigation of MOA "is based on specific and articulate facts giving justification to believe they are engaged in international terrorism."

Last year, Muslims of the Americas filed a lawsuit against the nonprofit Christian Action Network for defamation and libel after CAN’s publication of the book “Twilight in America: The Untold Story of Islamist Terrorist Training Camps Inside America.”

The book accuses Muslims of the Americas of “acting as a front for the radical Islamist group Jamaat al-Fuqra.”

Much of the book is based on the investigation of a former NYPD undercover informant who spent eight years posing as a member of the group. An informant with the New York Police Department (NYPD) , who worked for eight years undercover in Muslim American compounds, reveals that the group known as Muslims of the Americas has been training its members to wage jihad—holy war—against American citizens for decades, and has created a secret jihadi army within the United States. See their training camps right here in America!

"act like you are a friend and then kill him just like in the book"

The authors of the book, Martin Mawyer and Patti Pierucci, told Fox News they welcome the lawsuit because it will expose the Islamic group's activities.

Beltway sniper John Muhammad also has been tied to the group, and there is circumstantial evidence that links it to Oklahoma University bomber Joel Hinrichs.

Joseph Bodansky, the former director of the Congressional Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, has affirmed Jamaat al-Fuqra operations in the U.S. have been known to the FBI and CIA for decades.

Further info on these camps and their training is HERE.

Also please see verses from the Koran which fuels these Islamic jihadists/terrorists belief that they are doing the correct and right thing as directed by Allah HERE!

San Bernardino Shooting Declared An Act Of Terrorism By ISIS

STILL think that there's no need to worry about Islamic terrorism from Muslims here in the good ol'USA? After reading this I think the "conspiracy theory" is now a conspiracy FACT and you need to get your head out of your asses and get a grip on REALITY folks and DEMAND that our government does something and do it IMMEDIATELY!!

HEY OBAMA! Confirmed Act Of Terrorism, Your Move!

 MIKE LAVERY , DECEMBER 4, 2015 

Female Shooter Pledged pledged her allegiance to ISIS before the massacre (Image: AP)

• The  Pakistani woman who helped gun down 14 Wednesday at a Southern California holiday party pledged her allegiance to ISIS before the massacre
• Tashfeen Malik posted the pledge to ISIS leader and self-proclaimed “caliph” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi before the attack

Update:The F.B.I. is now treating the San Bernardino shooting by a husband and wife that killed 14 and wounded 21 as an act of terrorism, an agency official said Friday.

Read More:WHERE IS OBAMA? President Leaves It To Someone Else To Confirm Biggest Terror Attack Since Boston Bombing

The mysterious Pakistani woman who with her husband gunned down 14 Wednesday at a Southern California holiday party pledged her allegiance to ISIS before the massacre, according to a government source, in what appears to be concrete evidence that the rampage was at least inspired, if not directed, by the terrorist group.

Tashfeen Malik posted the pledge to ISIS leader and self-proclaimed “caliph” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi before the attack, in which she and her husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, stormed a San Bernardino party for his co-workers before escaping, Fox News confirmed through a law enforcement source who said the post was recovered despite the pair’s attempts to erase their digital trail. The couple died hours later in a shootout with police, and in the aftermath the 29-year-old Pakistani woman has remained largely a name without a face. No confirmed pictures of her have surfaced, and few details have emerged.

The pledge, posted on Facebook under another name and then deleted, was reported by The Associated Press, citing federal sources. It provided a fresh clue to Malik’s identity and motivation. The aura of mystery surrounding Malik has given rise to suspicions she may have been the radicalizing force who turned her new husband, Syed Rizwan Farook, from an aloof county restaurant inspector into her cohort in carnage, an Islamist fanatic capable of murdering co-workers who had embraced him for years.

“Usually it’s ISIS supporters trying to radicalize young girls online as they try to find new wives, but this may be the first case I know of where the opposite happened,” said Ryan Mauro, a national security analyst for Clarion Project, which tracks international terrorism.

Mauro noted that Farook’s older brother, who shares his name, served in the U.S. Navy, which would seem to indicate that Farook’s radical leanings did not come from within his own family.

“It is possible that she radicalized him or that suspected terrorists inside America he was communicating with are responsible for the radicalization, which led him to be attracted to a more hardline Salafi girl,” Mauro said.

What is known is that Malik met Farook online and that the two became engaged after Farook traveled to Saudi Arabia in September 2013. Malik applied for a K-1 visa at the American embassy in Islamabad in May, 2014 and two months later Farook again traveled to Saudi Arabia, met her there and brought her to the U.S. on a K-1 visa, a 90-day visa given to fiancés planning to marry Americans.

“Tashfeen remains the biggest mystery,” said a leader of the area’s Pakistani-American Muslim community. “She’s the one no one knows anything about and has little to no presence on the Internet or having interacted with others in the Muslim community.”

They were married on Aug. 16, 2014, in nearby Riverside County, Calif. according to their marriage license. The marriage and passage of criminal and national security background checks using FBI and Department of Homeland Security databases resulted in a conditional green card for Malik in July 2015, two months after she gave birth to their baby daughter.

Federal officials confirmed that the four guns Malik and Farook carried when they were killed in a shootout Wednesday afternoon, some three hours after storming the San Bernardino social services facility where his department was holding a holiday party, were purchased legally. Law enforcement sources told Fox News that investigators believe the couple’s death prevented a second attack Wednesday, though they have not established what the target would have been.

There have been reports Farook had ties to radicals in Pakistan and had a trip made there in recent years, but a source connected to the Pakistani Consulate in Los Angeles told FoxNews.com that he did not possess a Pakistani passport and that there is no record of him applying for a visa to travel to Pakistan through his local consulate. That did not preclude the possibility that he may have entered the country illegally or obtained a visa overseas or elsewhere.

Farook is a third-generation American from a family hailing from Karachi. Sources close to his family insisted that his marriage to Malik was not arranged. He told co-workers, who hosted a baby shower for him and his wife earlier this year, that Malik was a pharmacist. The California Board of Pharmacy has no record of her working as either a pharmacist or a pharmacist’s assistant.

Farook was a devout Muslim who prayed every day and recently memorized the Koran, according to brothers Nizaam and Rahemaan Ali, who attended Dar Al Uloom Al Islamiyah mosque in San Bernardino with Farook. Rahemaan Ali said he last saw Farook three weeks ago, when he abruptly stopped going to the mosque. Ali said Farook seemed happy and his usual self, and the brothers never saw a violent side.

“He never ever talked about killing people or discussed politics, or said that he had problems at work,” Rahemaan Ali said. “He always had a smile on his face.”

Prior to their marriage, Farook had multiple online dating profiles claiming he was a Sunni Muslim from a “religious but modern family” and that he was “looking for a girl who has the same outlook, wear hijab, but live life to the fullest, be my partner for snowboarding, to go out and eat with friends, go camping, working on cars with me.”

Farook was remembered as reserved by co-workers, who said he had grown his beard out in recent months – often a sign among Muslims of heightened religious devotion. He also had gotten into several heated arguments with a co-worker, Nicholas Thalasinos, about Islam. Thalasinos reportedly questioned whether Farook’s faith was truly a “religion of peace.” He was one of the 14 killed in Wednesday’s attack.

Neither Malik nor Farook had a criminal record, and the couple did not mix with the larger Pakistani-American community, and few people claim to have seen, let alone met, Malik, including neighbors. The Pakistani-American Muslim community leader, who asked that his name not be used, said the community believes is is clear that someone radicalized Farook.

“This event has shaken everyone,” said the source. “The fact that Syed and his wife seemed to be so removed from the community and no one really knows much about him or his wife at all can often be a key indicator something is wrong.”

Source: Fox News

So Much For NSA's Claims Of Mass Spying On Americans Would Help Stop Terrorism!

So all you bleeding heart liberals who are willing to give up your rights of freedom for ALLEGED safety measures do you STILL believe our government and the NSA? Do you also believe that Muslims are no threat to this country's way of life? If you do, then I think you need more mental help than what is humanly possible to provide!

BREAKING: Authorities now confirming our WORST fears about San Bernardino shooter…

Written by Michelle Jesse, Associate Editor on December 3, 2015

Prepare yourself to not be surprised. At all. Unless, of course, you’re President Obama, in which you *are* likely surprised — after learning about this on the news, of course.

Authorities are now disclosing that the shooter who brutally murdered 14 and wounded 21 yesterday in San Bernardino had been in touch with international terrorism subjects being investigated by the FBI.

Via CNN, of all places:

San Bernardino, California (CNN) [Breaking news update at 12:13 p.m. ET]

San Bernardino shooter Syed Rizwan Farook was in touch over the phone and via social media with more than one international terrorism subject who the FBI were already investigating, law enforcement officials said.

It appears that Farook was radicalized, which contributed to his motive, though other things — like workplace grievances — may have also played a role, other law enforcement sources said.

What’s perhaps most shocking — in the category of #shockingnotshocking — is that anyone is *still* suggesting “workplace grievances” played a meaningful role in yesterday’s massacre. This shooter — a devout Muslim — apparently had an “IED factory” in his home, after having recently returned from Saudi Arabia.

And, as Col. West asked earlier:

Do any of you buy the prospect that someone could become upset, drive home, find a female accomplice, get all “jocked up” with tac gear — to include body armor, various weapons, ammo, masks – even cameras — then return to the stated party and gun people down?

And, now, we’re learning that — as we feared — this shooter was indeed in contact with international terrorism subjects. So this doesn’t appear to be a case of a lone wolf (or wolves) — but, rather, seemingly connected to something larger.

As hard as the left is trying — so desperately — to fuel any other narrative BUT the reality of Islamic terrorism, it’s getting harder and harder for anyone to deny the facts.

Though the “breaking news” email I *just* received from the New York Times — as this news of the Muslim shooter was breaking — shows just how desperate they are to keep trying: “Pentagon Will Open All Combat Roles to Women.” Really, just wow. Nothing to see over here, folks, about the Muslim mass murderer who’s connected to international terrorists.

And while it’s shocking, yet not surprising, to realize how our world has — once again — changed overnight, what’s equally shocking and not surprising is the willful denial from the left.

Americans' Answer To Obama's Demand that They Talk About Gun Control Over Thanksgiving

Americans Bought Enough Guns Black Friday To Create a New Military Branch

Posted by Bob Owens on December 2, 2015 at 11:10 am

A petulant President Barack Obama demanded that Americans talk about gun control over Thanksgiving.

Citizens responded by buying enough firearms in one day to field an entire new military the size of the Marine Corps, with guns left over to equip 2-4 Army divisions.

Mr. President you have you answer.

It was a rousing “screw you.”

* * *

Exploitative members of the mainstream media and the Democrat Party have attempted to use the Islamic terror attacks in France to frighten Americans into passing “Minority Report” legislation for the past few weeks. This legislation would strip American citizens of their core rights without a trial, or without them even being accused of committing a crime.

Rather than discuss the renewed threat of Islamic terrorism or the thousands of Syrian refugees that will soon be streaming into the country, President Obama wants families to focus their conversations on gun control while they are enjoying their turkey dinner this Thanksgiving.

In a press briefing on Monday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest continued to push the president’s gun control agenda. The White House is now focusing on an effort by Democrats to ban Americans who are on the “no-fly” list from purchasing a firearm.

“As people sitting around the Thanksgiving table talking about these issues, as they should, and I’m sure they will all across the country, I hope that’s a question that will be raised and asked by members around the table,” Earnest said, referring to the bill sponsored by congressional Democrats.

A stunning 40% of the people on this so-called “terror watch list”—somewhere between 280,00-300,000 souls—have no ties at all to terror groups. The FBI, CIA, NSA, and other intelligence organizations find the list to be almost worthless, and have not called for Congress to pass this legislation. this is nothing more or less than an attempt by one political party to amass power for itself at the expense of the citizenry.

Indeed, Americans are painfully aware that the mainstream media and the Democrat Party are itching for the power to declare more than five million Americans are terrorists for merely belonging to the Republic’s oldest civil rights group.

In direct response to the threat posed to the Bill of Rights by the Democrat Party, Americans responded by purchasing more than 200,000 firearms this past Friday alone, a new single-day record for the nation.

* * *

The FBI’s NICS Operations Center processed a staggering 185,345 background check requests on “Black Friday.”

What the media doesn’t grasp is that these background check is only a rough proxy for gun sales, and are a clear undercount of both the number of buyers, and of actual sales.

Concealed carriers—of which there are more than 13 million, with more added every day—typically don’t have NICS background checks run on them when they purchase a firearm from a gun dealer.

Why?

Because concealed carry permitting requires much more extensive and in-depth background checks than the NICS database searches, and so is accepted as a bettersubstitute when an ATF Form 4473 is filled out with every gun purchase or transfer.

For example, I’ve had probably 15 firearms come through my hands in the past few years that I purchased/transferred in using my concealed carry permit as my background check. None of those were run through NICS and so weren’t counted in the FBI’s tally. Keep in mind that concealed carriers also tend to be “more serious” gun buyers, and more prone to both buying and owning multiple firearms. These 13 million souls are more likely to buy firearms than the general population, but they don’t show up in the NICS report.

A conservative estimate suggests that when you add NICS background check purchasers and concealed carriers together, there were easily more than 200,000 people buying firearms on Black Friday.

Here’s where it really gets interesting, as we look at the nature of the nation’s “big sale day” itself.

There are deep discounts that are driving these sales, and so many Black Friday shoppers buy multiple firearms. It is relatively common to have an individual purchase 2-5 firearms with one background check (or concealed carry permit), as any gun counter employee who has worked a Black Friday will tell you. While it has been a number of years since I worked retail gun sales, I’d estimate that 5%-10% of purchasers buy multiple firearms.

It’s reasonable to conclude that roughly 225,000 firearms were purchased on Black Friday.

To give you a sense of scale, there are “only” 182,000 active-duty Marines, and Army divisions are currently made up of 10,000-18,000 soldiers.

Obama asked Americans to think about gun control over the holidays.

Americans responded by purchasing enough firearms to create another branch of military service, with divisions in reserve.

You have you answer, Mr. President.

Tread wisely.