Tag: terrorism

Intel Community Warns Of “Possible Threats To Public Gatherings” Across US

In early March, FBI Director Chris Wray warned a Senate panel that dangerous individuals had entered the United States illegally at the southern border.

“We have had dangerous individuals entering the United States have a variety of sources,” Wray said at the annual “Worldwide Threats” congressional hearings. 

Fast forward to Friday, an ABC News report citing a US intelligence bulletin warns that “radicals in the US might respond to ISIS calls for similar attacks in the wake of last month’s deadly terrorist attack at a concert hall in Moscow.” 

The bulletin said “lone wolves” might be compelled to attack public venues following the attack at a popular concert hall complex near Moscow last month. It warned that individuals who are not members of ISIS could also unleash attacks. 

Given this new warning, and what has the national intelligence community up at night, is President Biden and Democrat’s disastrous open southern borders that flooded the nation with millions of unvetted migrants – some of whom are military-aged men from countries that deeply hate America. 

Keep reading

Uncomfortable Truth: The US Is The World’s Most Prolific Sponsor Of Terrorism

Upon reading the title of this article many might reflexively click off, going straight to the comments section to voice their disapproval, to vitriolically chastise the perceived lack of patriotism and the insinuation that the United States of America is anything but the greatest bastion of freedom and liberty in the world. A beacon of light in the dark protecting democracy from the dregs of despotism.

It is a reaction that has been programmed into many of us, one that even among the “liberty community” many, including yours truly, espoused at one time or another. Since birth we are programmed via nationalistic propaganda to have such a worldview.

Every single day of our schooling for at least 12 years we are indoctrinated to place our hands over our hearts and pledge our allegiance to the nation, in other words our loyalty to the government, or more specifically — given the origins of the pledge itself — the ideologies of colonialism in honoring Christopher Columbus, Anglo-American ethno-nationalism, and later, a reinforcement of US political and religious moral superiority, that is itself inherent to the government and its systemic norms.

Denoting these sentiments under a negative connotation will as well likely spark the ire of many who still refuse to acknowledge the role of settler-colonialism in the American experiment, but we digress.

The point is, we as Americans have been institutionally inculcated our entire lives with sentiments of nationalism and American exceptionalism which have subsequently, with assistance in no small part from the heavily controlled corporate mainstream media and the centralized education system, blinded huge swaths of the population from the realities of the innumerable crimes committed by the American government. Both in the past, and the present day.

Chief among these misbehaviors would be the ways in which America would behave itself with regard to it’s foreign policy, both early in its existence as a burgeoning superpower and today as the leader of a globe spanning unipolar hegemon.

Beginning with the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 wherein the US asserted itself as being the sole authority in the entirety of the Western Hemisphere, It would slowly go on to refine this doctrine as justification for intervention and expansionism, first in Latin America and expanding outward to the rest of the world.

As the US would continue to expand its power and influence over its global neighbors the destabilization of sovereign governments that Washington viewed as being at odds or potentially deleterious to its agendas of regional control became standard procedure.

We recently elaborated upon this briefly with regard to the century of US intervention in Haiti and the long history of US backed regime change.

Keep reading

Mayorkas Pressed to Explain Terror-Listed Illegal Immigrants Released Into US

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas is facing renewed pressure to explain the circumstances of inadmissible aliens on the terrorist watchlist being released into the United States rather than being held in custody until deportation.

A group of Homeland Security Republicans expressed serious concern in an April 3 letter to Mr. Mayorkas about unanswered questions regarding DHS’s current practices in processing and releasing known or suspected terrorists into the United States.

“We are now facing a consistent stream of cases highlighted in the news of aliens allegedly on the terrorists watchlist either being apprehended at the border or discovered in the interior,” they wrote.

Their concern comes as U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) data show that there’s been a whopping 3,000-plus percent increase (comparing former President Donald Trump’s term and that of President Joe Biden’s so far) in the number of people on the FBI’s terror watchlist caught trying to enter the country illegally.

The lawmakers—including House Committee on Homeland Security Chairman Mark Green (R-Tenn.) and Subcommittee on Counterterrorism, Law Enforcement, and Intelligence Chairman August Pfluger (R-Texas)—expressed particular concern about the number of terrorist gotaways.

The number of terrorist gotaways could be alarmingly high if it tracks with the 3,000-plus percent rise in the number of apprehended illegal immigrants on the terror watchlist between the Trump and Biden presidencies.

Keep reading

Harvard scrubs ‘How to Blow Up a Pipeline’ film info from website

Harvard Law School scrubbed its website of an event page advertising a screening of the film “How to Blow Up a Pipeline” amid concerns about endorsing violence.

Internet archives show the event page was removed sometime between Friday and Tuesday when The College Fix noticed it was gone. A post advertising the screening on Harvard’s Systemic Justice Project website also was removed prior to the event.

“How to Blow Up a Pipeline” is a fictional story about climate activists who blow up a section of pipe in Texas, according to the film’s website.

The trailer opens with a man building a homemade explosive and ends with police arriving at the site of a pipeline that has been blown up. The characters call the bombing “justified” and “an act of self-defense.”

It is unclear if the Wednesday evening screening was canceled, rescheduled, or still took place.  The Fix contacted the HLS Film Society, communications office, and event moderator Professor Jon Hanson by email and phone Tuesday asking if the event had been canceled. None replied.

The Fix also reached out to the film society, Hanson, and the communications office March 28 with questions regarding the concerns about the film endorsing violence and university organizers’ stance on peaceful advocacy.

The film screening drew criticism online in recent weeks, including concerns that Harvard may be supporting violent activism. Critics include U.S. Rep. Mike Bost, an Illinois Republican, who said in a March 28 post on X that violent acts like those portrayed in the film are the reason he supports harsher penalties for eco-terrorism.

Keep reading

Reuters Has Ulterior Motives For Reporting That Iran Tipped Russia Off Before The Crocus Attack

Reuters cited three unnamed sources to exclusively report on Monday that Iran had allegedly tipped Russia off about a then-impending major terrorist attack after learning about it from ethnic Tajik ISIS-K terrorists who were detained after the group’s early January attack in Kerman. The information lacked specific details, but the outlet editorialized that “It is harder…for Russia to dismiss intelligence from diplomatic ally Iran on the attack” than from the West, the latter of which they claim that it downplayed.

Accordingly, Reuters wrote that this “raised questions over the effectiveness of Russian security services”, thus exposing the ulterior motive behind this report. The West has done all that it can to deflect from Russia’s accusations that Ukraine was tied to this terrorist attack via the evidence that its investigation has uncovered. This includes claiming that the vague warning that the US passed along to Russia was obtained from spying on ISIS-K, not on Kiev like this analysis here compellingly argues.

By including an Iranian dimension into the emerging narrative of early warnings ahead of the Crocus terrorist attack, the West via Reuters wants to further deflect from its own and Ukraine’s involvement in what happened while simultaneously discrediting the Russian security services. This analysis here debunks the false narrative that President Putin downplayed ISIS-K threats in the run-up to the attack, yet the West is doubling down on that claim, largely in response to evidence implicating Kiev.

To be sure, there’s a chance that one or some of those ethnic Tajik ISIS-K terrorists that Iran detained in January might have heard about the group’s plans to attack Russia, but that’s altogether different than them having knowledge of the then-impending Crocus plot. Russia already knows that it’s in that group’s crosshairs after they bombed its embassy in Kabul in September 2022. Without specific information, whether from Iran or anyone else, nothing on the home front would have changed in response to that.

Keep reading

Russia Demands Ukraine Arrest and Hand Over SBU Head Vasyl Malyuk, After He Admits on TV Role in Terror Attacks

Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs has come out and unveiled Moscow’s demand that Ukraine authorities hand over all people connected with terrorist acts committed in their territory.

The list surprisingly even includes the head of Kiev’s SBU Security Service, Vasyl Malyuk.

Besides the recent ‘bloody Crocus terrorist act’, the attacks in question include bombings that killed the daughter of a prominent nationalist philosopher, a war blogger, and another incident in which a writer was seriously hurt.

While the investigation by the Russian authorities indicate that the traces of all these crimes lead to Ukraine, in the case of Malyuk there is a voluntary admission on TV.

“We will not officially admit this in any way, but at the same time I will tell you some details,” he said in an interview with a Ukrainian TV channel.

Reuters reported:

“‘Russia has turned over to Ukrainian authorities its demands … for the immediate arrest and extradition of all those connected to the terrorist acts in question’, the [Russian Ministry’s] statement said.

The ministry statement said those to be handed over included SBU head Vasyl Malyuk, who has acknowledged [in an interview with Ukrainian television channel ICTV] his service was behind attacks on the bridge linking Crimea to the Russian mainland […].

‘The Russian side demands that the Kyiv regime immediately cease all support for terrorist activity, extradite guilty parties and compensate the victims for damages’, it said.

‘Ukraine’s violation of its obligations under anti-terrorist conventions will result in it being held to account in international legal terms’.”

Here are some other excerpts by the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

“Other barbaric terrorist attacks using explosive devices cost the lives of journalists D.A. Dugina and M.Yu. Fomin (V. Tatarsky), led to the serious injury of the writer E.N. Prilepin and the death of his driver A.I. Shubin, the death of five people as a result of the explosion of the Crimean Bridge, 42 people were injured in an explosion in a cafe in St. Petersburg.”

It does seem odd for a warring party to demand another to comply with treaties and conventions.

Keep reading

‘Operation Anti-Migrant’: Russia Starts Mass Deporting Muslims After Moscow Concert Massacre

Russian authorities have begun deporting large numbers of Muslims in the wake of last week’s deadly Islamist state attack at a Moscow concert hall, in an effort that has been reportedly dubbed “Operation Anti-Migrant.”

According to The Moscow Times, anti-Islamic sentiment has soared in the aftermath of the attack, in which at least 144 people were killed and hundreds of more were wounded or in critical condition. Islamic State has since claimed responsibility for the massacre.

The Times notes:

Authorities in St. Petersburg have been deporting migrants en masse in the week since the deadly attack on a Moscow region concert hall, the legal rights group Perviy Otdel said Friday. More than 64 foreigners were deported from the city’s Vyborgsky district on Thursday alone, the NGO said, citing one of its unidentified lawyers.

…

A number of buses carrying migrants were also headed to St. Petersburg’s Pulkovo International Airport on Friday afternoon, they added. The countries where the migrants were being sent to were not specified, though it is known that labor migrants in Russia mostly hail from poor Central Asian countries.

The four men accused of carrying out the attack were from Tajikistan, a majority Muslim country that does not share a border with Russia.

Keep reading

Did The US First Catch Wind Of The Crocus Terrorist Attack By Spying On Kiev?

This accounts for why the US only passed along vague information to Russia since it assumed that the GUR wouldn’t go through with the Crocus plot after ordering them to call it off, but Washington still wanted to discredit its rival’s government and security services, ergo its embassy’s provocative warning at the time.

The New York Times (NYT) cited unnamed sources on Thursday to report that “The adversarial relationship between Washington and Moscow prevented U.S. officials from sharing any information about the (Crocus terrorist attack) plot beyond what was necessary, out of fear Russian authorities might learn their intelligence sources or methods.” This vindicates President Putin, who the West hitherto claimed had downplayed terrorist threats in the run-up to one of the worst attacks in Russian history.

Without actionable intelligence and informed only of the US’ vague warning that large gatherings like concerts could soon be targeted, his security services were unable to stop the plotters, thus meaning that Washington is partially responsible for what happened by withholding specific information about it. Just as scandalously, this bombshell also prompted speculation about the exact sources and methods that America employed to first catch wind of this attack.

While it’s possible that the US learned about this from spying on the radical Telegram channel whose curators reportedly recruited the culprits, such as if the CIA had a mole inside that preacher’s team, the case can compellingly be made that this might have actually been brought to its attention by spying on Kiev. Last spring’s Pentagon leaks confirmed that the US has been spying on Zelensky, which Ukrainian officials told CNN was “unsurprising” but still left them “deeply frustrated”.

Those documents also confirmed that the US was spying on Ukraine’s military-intelligence service GUR as well, from whom they learned about a plot to attack the Russian port of Novorossiysk on the first anniversary of the special operation and then ordered them to stand down to avoid provoking Moscow. Seeing as how the Washington Post (WaPo) reported half a year later that the CIA rebuilt the GUR from the ground-up after 2014, it’s obvious that they embedded moles within that institution from the get-go.

They don’t always learn about terrorist plots ahead of time since their infiltration of the GUR and other Ukrainian government agencies isn’t total, but they’re still usually able to conclude sometime afterwards that Kiev was responsible whenever a serious attack happens in Russia. Such was the case last May when the NYT reported that Kiev was responsible for the Kremlin drone attack, in which piece they also reminded their reader that it was behind other attacks up until that point too.

These include the assassinations of Darya Dugina and Vladlen Tatarsky, cross-border terrorist raids into Russia’s Belgorod Region, and the Nord Stream II bombing. About that last-mentioned one, the claim of Ukrainian complicity might very well be a preplanned red herring for deflecting from American involvement after Seymour Hersh served as the conduit for dissident members of the Intelligence Community (IC) to inform the public that their country was the one that ordered that attack.

Keep reading

U.S. History of Using ISIS

Back in 2015, the Guardian published a fascinating report titled Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq, which detailed how U.S. and British intelligence were supporting Islamic jihadist rebel groups in Syria with the objective of overthrowing the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

The report included a link to a leaked 2012 Department of Defense document about U.S. support for these rebel groups in Syria, including ISIS. This report stuck with me, and I was a reminded of it a couple of years later when Assad was accused in April 2017 of using chemical weapons against Syrian civilians.Buy New $47.97 ($0.53 / Count)(as of 02:32 UTC – Details)

Notably, this chemical weapons attack just happened to occur the day after Secretary of State Rex Tillerson publicly announced that regime change in Syria was no longer official U.S. policy. In other words—we were told—the day after the U.S. announced it was getting off Assad’s case, he committed an atrocity (of zero military value) that would guarantee that the U.S. recommit itself to getting rid of him.

Though most of the legacy press endorsed the assertion that Assad’s forces were behind the attack, a few discerning reporters noted that it could have easily been carried about by one of the Islamic jihadist groups operating in the region to make the Trump administration rethink its abandonment of its regime change objective. Sure enough, a couple of days after the chemical attack, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson announced that he was reconsidering his announcement the week before.

Now comes the news of a major terrorist attack on the Crocus City Hall in Moscow that has left hundreds dead and injured. The U.S. government claims the attack was carried out by ISIS-K, which has reportedly taken responsibility for it. However, Kremlin officials have alleged that some of the gunmen were trying to escape into Ukraine, utilizing a ‘window’ of support from across the border.

Buy New $63.95 ($5.95 / Ounce)(as of 11:17 UTC – Details)The U.S. government just issued a statement condemning the terrorist attack in Moscow, but this reminds me of U.S. government doublespeak about ISIS back in the 2012-2017 period—that is, publicly condemning ISIS while secretly supporting it in Syria.

My concern now is that the attack on the Moscow theater was—like the Re’im music festival massacre in Israel last October—designed to provoke the absolute maximum violent response.

Keep reading

Putin Beyond ISIS: Moscow Terrorist Attack ‘A Link in a Series of Attempts by the Neo-Nazi Kiev Regime’

On the ground, Russian forces behaved in a modified, more acute way after the false flag terrorist attack ultimately organized by Ukraine claimed the lives of hundreds of Moscow civilians.

But on the world stage, Russian President Vladimir Putin is playing a longer game, waiting for the investigations to demonstrate as clearly as possible the link.

Yesterday (26), in a Kremlin meeting, Putin acknowledged that the attack was carried out by Islamic militants but suggested it was also to the benefit of Ukraine and that Kyiv may have played a role.

Alexander Bastrykin, head of Russia’s Investigative Committee, said the death toll had risen to 139, with 182 people wounded.

Reuters reported:

“‘We know that the crime was carried out by the hand of radical Islamists with an ideology that the Muslim world has fought for centuries’, Putin said in remarks posted on the Telegram messaging app.

He did not directly mention Islamic State, and repeated his previous assertion that the assailants had been trying to flee to Ukraine, saying there were “many questions” to be examined.

‘The question that arises is who benefits from this?’ Putin said. ‘This atrocity may be just a link in a whole series of attempts by those who have been at war with our country since 2014 by the hands of the neo-Nazi Kiev regime.

‘We know by whose hand the crime against Russia and its people was committed. But what is of interest to us is who ordered it’.

Putin said the purpose of the attack was to ‘sow panic’. But as Russian forces were advancing through the Ukraine war theatre, he said, it could also be intended to ‘show their own population that not all is lost for the Kiev regime’.

Meanwhile, both the US and France push the ISIS story as hard as they can.

11 people have been detained, including the four gunmen, who were arrested as they made their way to cross into Ukraine.

Keep reading