[Editor’s note: the excerpt of this article is shared to reflect where Obama’s CDC is headed with sex education in America]
There’s no nice way to put this: Sex education in the United States sucks.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released new data today showing that fewer than half of high schools and only a fifth of middle schools teach all 16 sex education topics recommended by the agency [see below for a partial listing of these topics]. In a country where nearly half of teens report having had sex and nearly a quarter of new HIV infections occur among people under 25, that’s a dangerous level of ignorance to perpetuate.
Dr. Stephanie Zaza, director of the CDC’s Division of Adolescent and School Health, told The Daily Beast that, in comparison to findings from previous years, this year’s data shows a “mostly flat” trend, or “a lack of increase in the topics being taught in schools throughout the country.”
In other words, it’s not getting better.
The CDC’s findings are based on a 2014 survey that asked middle and high schools in 44 participating states what percent of schools cover essential topics ranging from the benefits of abstinence to STD prevention to condom use. These aren’t particularly radical topics; the CDC is hardly recommending that schools teach teens about sadomasochism or proper orgy etiquette. (Read more from “CDC Gives U.S. An F for Sex Ed” HERE)
*How to access valid information, products and services related to sexual health
*Preventive care that is necessary to maintain reproductive and sexual health
*Efficacy of condoms
*Importance of using condoms consistently and correctly
*Importance of using a condom at the same time as another form of contraception
*How to obtain condoms
*How to correctly use a condom
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00kathleenhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngkathleen2015-12-11 00:02:392016-04-11 10:55:16Sick CDC Gives U.S. An F for Sex Ed; Too Many States Teach Abstinence, Not Condom Use
Earlier today, the political social media world erupted with universal sanctimony and outrage over Donald Trump’s comments suggesting the U.S. bar all Muslims from entering the country. Let’s put aside, for a moment, the problematic nature of Trump’s position in which he included citizens among those he’d exclude. Obviously, that is unconstitutional (exclusion of non-citizens is absolutely constitutional). The political elites are expressing moral outrage and righteous indignation over such an expression of bigotry.
Well, I just want you to consider the following two facts and juxtapose them to each other.
First, over the next 10 years, the U.S. is likely to admit over 1 million immigrants from predominantly Muslim countries. That does not include the well over 1 million from those countries who will likely enter on long-term non-immigrant visas, most prominently, student visas. And these are conservative estimates.
Now consider the following study from Pew Research in 2010 regarding views of individuals living in Muslim countries towards Jews which Mark Levin mentioned it on his show tonight.
Now keep in mind the state of Europe in regards to Islamic immigration and the increasing frequency of stories of racist treatment of Jews. Now pair this with the first fact listed above with regard to the source of America’s Islamic immigration.
Which immigration policy reflects true compassion, humanity, and tolerance?
Anyone who is not concerned about this trend and what it portends for American Jews is being sanctimonious and not concerned with actual tolerance.
The chart speaks for itself. (For more from the author of “What Does the Muslim World Think of Jews?” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-12-10 01:56:182016-04-11 10:55:16What Does the Muslim World Think of Jews?
Congress is set to vote on Thursday on what some have called an “unprecedented” right that would allow immigrants easier access to relocate to the United States, according to new legislation offered by a Democratic senator.
The legislation, which is being offered by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.) as an amendment to a larger bill governing nuclear safety, would prohibit the U.S. government from barring any individual from entering the country based on their religion.
The bill comes amid a fierce national debate about immigration to America, particularly for individuals coming from Muslim-majority nations. Critics of the Obama administration’s refugee plan, which would permit up to 10,000 Syrians into the country, maintain that there are not enough oversight measures in place to ensure that immigrants are not linked to terrorists or various terror organizations, such as the Islamic State.
The bill, a copy of which was obtained by the Washington Free Beacon, would express Congress’ sense that “the United States must not bar individuals from entering into the United States based on their religion, as such action would be contrary to the fundamental principles on which this Nation was founded.”
The legislation is a direct amendment to current U.S. laws already on the books. (Read more from “Congress to Consider Easing Passage into U.S. For Immigrants” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-12-10 01:55:582016-04-11 10:55:16Congress to Consider Easing Passage into U.S. For Immigrants
“This power over the purse may, in fact, be regarded as the most complete and effectual weapon with which any constitution can arm the immediate representatives of the people, for obtaining a redress of every grievance, and for carrying into effect every just and salutary measure.” James Madison, Federalist #58
This week will serve as the harbinger for how dramatically Obama will be able to “fundamentally transform” America during his final year in office — coinciding with a time of unprecedented domestic and international security threats.
When the voters elect a divided government, the expectation is that each side will have to implement some policies that the other dislikes. With Republicans in control of Congress and the purse strings that come with that power, the December budget bill will be the last opportunity to redress the grievances from which the American people seek relief. This is a time for Republicans to fight for a number of policies that, if not rescinded, will cause irrevocable damage to either our security or our economy. Particularly in Obama’s final year it is vital that Republicans preemptively curb him from consummating the great fundamental transformation.
While there are endless liberal policies conservatives would love to block in the budget bill, there are certain items that must be defunded now and cannot wait for the next president.
Stop Obama’s Dangerous Refugee Program
Republicans are floating the idea of attaching their phony refugee bill to the omnibus. Their bill will not shut down the program; the best way to prevent future radical Islamists from entering our nation. It’s time Republicans harness the overwhelming public opposition to refugee resettlement and defund the entire program for the rest of the fiscal year until the Government Accountability Office conducts a full audit of the program’s security problems and fiscal cost. As Sen. Jeff Sessions noted, if Republicans fund refugee resettlement in the omnibus, December 11 will truly be a date that will live in infamy. The details of the San Bernardino terror attack demonstrate just how dangerous our immigration policies can be. The budget bill will provide Congress with the last chance to block the new immigration of radical sharia-adherent Muslims from Syria and potential terrorists like Tafsheen Malik.
Republicans should force Democrats into the awkward position defending terrorists.
Defund Amnesty
The release of tens of thousands of dangerous criminal aliens into our communities is undoubtedly the biggest threat to our security for the remainder of this presidency.
But the problem is not only limited to sanctuary cities. It’s localities, such as Frederick County, Maryland, that want to cooperate with ICE but are stymied from doing so. Why? Because Obama has essentially repealed the Secure Communities and 287(g) programs designed to coordinate and train local law enforcement in helping with immigration enforcement. Republicans must condition funding for DHS to the reinstatement of Secure Communities and 287(g). They must also defund DACA, which is still incentivizing a massive border surge to this very day. And obviously, they must defund sanctuary cities. We cannot afford another year of mass illegal immigration. Yet, at present, as Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) noted, Republicans are planning to fund every aspect of Obama’s amnesty agenda in the Omnibus.
At a time when we have record immigration from the Muslim world, in conjunction with no deportations, no visa tracking, and an open border, we have never been more vulnerable to a terror attack. This cannot stand another year.
Defund Planned Parenthood
Republicans will never have as much momentum behind defunding Planned Parenthood as they do now. Given the shocking video exposés of their harvesting and selling of baby organs and the fact that the organization is under criminal investigation, there is no excuse for Republicans to grant them new taxpayer funds. Besides, there is never a bad time to defund taxpayer-funded murder.
Stop Arming Syrian Rebels and Iraq Army
We should not spend another dime and another year arming rebels in Syria that are either infiltrated or over-run by Al Qaeda. Ditto for the Iraqi army, which is either inept or a proxy for Iran. Let’s stop arming our enemies and save ourselves hundreds of millions while we are at it. What is so disconcerting is that Syed Farook, the San Bernardino terrorist, had contacts with Al Nusra, the very terror group that has received light and heavy arms from our very own CIA. This cannot be allowed to continue.
Stop Aid to the Palestinian Authority
It’s never a bad time to stop funding the Palestinians. But with the sick stabbing intifada under way in Israel, and now under way in some U.S. cities, isn’t it time we end the $500 million in U.S. aid to this decedent and corrupt organization? Republicans should also defund the United Nations Relief and Works Agency. Every year, the U.S. contributes roughly $275 million a year to this multinational group that has long harbored Palestinian terrorists under the guise of humanitarian aid. Republicans should force Democrats into the awkward position defending terrorists.
Block Obama’s Jailbreak
In addition to setting criminal aliens free, Obama has made it the top priority of his final year to let out as many violent criminals from the federal prison system as possible. Instead of fighting his jailbreak, Republicans at all levels, including Paul Ryan, are seeking to codify his agenda with legislative jailbreak. Republicans would be wise to reverse course and defund any additional prison release for the remainder of this presidency.
Block Gun Control
Given everything that is transpiring with the aforementioned issues — record Islamic immigration, rampant criminal aliens, and mass prison releases — there is no time of greater danger for the American people than now. Consequently, the Second Amendment is more important than ever. Yet, in all likelihood Obama will pull the trigger on gun restrictions via administrative fiat during his final year. Republicans must insert a provision prohibiting any new administrative regulation on firearms or ammo during the next fiscal year.
Block Environmental Regulations
Even if by some miracle Obama is thwarted from implementing his societal changes and threatening our security, he is inexorably committed to remaking our economy through last minute energy regulations. He already announced his intention to cut carbon emissions of power plants by 32%, essentially ensuring that not a single new power plant will be built on our soil. Give that energy is the lifeblood of our economy and Obama’s final year in office will likely be spent targeting that lifeblood, Republicans must preempt this plan by prohibiting the promulgation of any new regulations on power plants for the rest of his presidency.
Block Obama’s Social Engineering in the Military
Last week, Obama’s Defense Secretary announced a shocking plan to coerce all military service branches into opening every single combat position to women. Even if this wasn’t a time of war, such a move is absurd, dangerous, and further degrades the morale and combat readiness of our military.
The Marine Corp conducted a painstaking study on this issue and found conclusively that placing women in direct ground combat unity, much less Special Forces, would harm their effectiveness. A recent survey showed near unanimity of opinion among special operators in opposition to women joining their ranks. By allowing this new edict to slide, as most Republicans plan to do, they will be complicit in causing irrevocable damage on our military at a time of grave national security concerns. They must attack a provision to defense funding blocking the Pentagon from implementing their women in combat plan against the wishes of the commanders in the field.
Don’t hold your breath for Republicans to fight in a meaningful was on any of the aforementioned issues. But it’s important to reflect upon the common sense actions a legitimate opposition party in control of the congressional purse strings would take in defense of the nation’s sovereignty, security, and society. (For more from the author of “9 Harmful Policies GOP Must Block in Budget Bill” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-12-10 01:55:102016-04-11 10:55:179 Harmful Policies GOP Must Block in Budget Bill
Two Afghan Air Force trainees did not report for duty Monday at Moody Air Force Base in Valdosta, Georgia, and are missing, according to officials.
U.S. military officials emphasized there are no indications the two men pose a threat, and the main concern is their failing to show up for duty.
“Both [men] are assigned to the 81st Fighter Squadron. They have been at Moody since February 2015 and were screened prior to their arrival in the United States more than a year ago,” Air Force officials said in a statement.
“The students have trained alongside American counterparts for the entirety of 2015 and do not pose any apparent threat. There is a well-coordinated process among federal agencies to locate the individuals as quickly as possible and return them accordingly to the proper authorities,” Air Force officials added.
This is not the first time that Afghan trainees have gone missing from a military training program within the U.S. In one incident in 2014 when Afghan soldiers went missing in Massachusetts and they were found attempting to seek asylum near the Canadian border. In another instance, soldiers went missing during a tour in D.C. and were later sent back to Afghanistan. (Read more from “2 Afghan Trainees Missing from Georgia Air Force Base” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-12-10 01:50:412016-04-11 10:55:172 Afghan Trainees Missing from Georgia Air Force Base
And The Lord opened the mouth of the she-donkey. [Numbers 22:28]
The past 36-hour news cycle has been a demonstration of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, in which the state-run media would display “two minutes hate” against Emmanuel Goldberg—the ultimate enemy of the state and the source of all evil in the world. From watching both the media and every GOP public figure tripping over themselves to condemn Trump in a fit of rage and flying spittle, one would think that Jihad, our border crisis, and the criminal alien emergency don’t exist. Trump is the sole source of our societal ills.
One could agree or disagree with Trump’s comments. One could think they are repulsive, unhelpful, imprudent, or—in the case of barring citizens (but not foreign nationals)—unconstitutional. But where is the sense of proportionality? Where is the sense of perspective about the real problems we face? One might think Trump is not the solution; one might think he’d be a harmful solution. But for goodness sakes, he is not the problem.
The problem is pan-Islamic supremacism, open borders, and a completely malfeasant political class in both parties.
Yesterday, I listed nine urgent and harmful Obama policies that must be addressed or we will face irrevocable damage to our sovereignty, security, society, and economy in the coming year. Yet, there is not a peep from Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, or any other GOP establishment figure. Where is the outrage over the harvesting of baby organs by Planned Parenthood, which is still receiving taxpayer funds? Where is the outrage over Obama’s continued suspension of deportation for criminal aliens, including murderers who committed homicides after being released?
And as it relates to the issue of Islamic terror, sharia law, and immigration, why is there a sudden focus on the straw-man position of barring every last Muslim from anywhere, forever, for any reason? That might be a silly or repugnant solution—depending on your personal views—but that is not the problem. The problem is suicidal immigration policies and open borders. Focusing on those who want to bar every last Muslim instead of clamping down on the current reality of mass and indiscriminate migration from the Middle East or the 935% increase in student visas from Saudi Arabia is morally dyslexic.
It’s akin to those who want to distract from the abortion debate and focus on the rare exceptions and extenuating circumstances as an excuse not to have a mature discussion over mass abortion on demand, including late-term and partial birth abortions. Even if one personally believes that those seeking to ban abortion in all circumstances are wrong, he or she is not the problem. The problem is baby-killing on demand.
The same principle applies here. We are committing national suicide by irresponsibly making Middle East immigration our fastest growing subset of immigration at a time of tragically successful cyber jihad and with the paradigm of Europe starkly and ominously warning us of what this policy of open borders portends.
Where is the outrage from Susan Collins on a single one of these issues? Nowhere to be found, apparently, as she crawled out of her witness protection program and almost blew a fuse condemning Trump.
How ironic that on the same day Trump made his comments, a naturalized Syrian immigrant, was arrested for smuggling arms to Syrian terrorists. The government refuses to release his immigration history and the media and beltway “conservatives” are completely uninterested in finding out more information.
Instead, the oleaginous “right-thinking” pundits all over twitter flirt with the idea that Trump is like Hitler. These same people evidently depleted their reserves of outrage and had nothing left to condemn DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson for speaking at a Mosque affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that quite literally shares Hitler’s goal of exterminating Jews.
While the professional conservative thumb-suckers savagely censure Trump for his solution, they have refused to voice support for Ted Cruz’s common sense and constitutional bills on refugees, designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terror group, and stripping ISIS fighters of their U.S. citizenship. In fact, they are insidiously trying to shame Cruz into joining in the chorus of maniacal hate against Trump to take him off his positive and constructive message addressing the problems they refuse to confront.
This is all about the establishment Republicans and the beltway “conservatives” frenetically begging the media to accept them as good and humane people.
Spare us the sanctimony and self-righteousness, folks. We don’t need acceptance from those who blithely ignore the harvesting of baby organs; though clearly the conservative political elites pine for their approval.
Our future security and the preservation of western civilization in this era of global Jihad is an issue that requires a mature discussion about geo-political realities. It is a discussion that is greater than any one person and their political ambitions. And it is the very discussion the political elites on both sides of the pale-colored political divide seek to avoid. (For more from the author of “Trump, Sovereignty, Security and the GOP’s Perverted Priorities” please click HERE)
Many are not surprised that Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter chose to fully repeal the women’s combat exemption, especially those who’ve been pushing for it. But many regular Americans are surprised at what it actually means.
The mother of a new female Marine I spoke with last week was understandably upset to find out women can now be involuntarily assigned to these units, just like men.
Carter confirmed this when he said, “People are assigned to missions, tasks, and functions according to need as well as their capabilities. And women will be subject to the same standard and rules that men will.” Women may also now be subject to selective service obligations.
These may be classified as decisions in the name of “equality,” except that women don’t have an equal opportunity for survival and success in the violence of real combat at point-blank range. For many Americans, the reality is only now starting to sink in.
The tiny few who are willing and maybe able still bring much higher risk of injury, lesser performance and are higher value targets to our enemies, all of which unnecessarily adds risk and weakness for everyone involved. The Marine Corps’ recent 9-month integration study showed that all-male teams outperformed coed teams in 69 percent of combat tasks.
Women — top performers who had made men’s minimum fitness standards and passed enlisted infantry training — were slower, were less accurate shooters, struggled with tasks requiring upper body strength, and suffered more than double the injuries of men.
These factors can’t be ignored when speed is a weapon and brute strength is at a premium, but that’s exactly what Carter did in his decision.
Women are also at a significant disadvantage in hand-to-hand combat against men who want to kill them. Technology has not changed the violence of close quarters combat, as the accounts of infantry veterans from Iraq and Afghanistan amply show. They have been using their knives and bare hands face to face when required. No, this is not equal opportunity.
The secretary assured us that women will have to meet the same high standards as men, but how is that really possible when, for example, none of the 29 women who attempted the Marine’s Officer Infantry Course were able to pass? In the initial announcement of repeal, Gen. Martin Dempsey called for the standards to be “re-evaluated,” putting the onus on the combat units to prove why their standards are so high if women can’t make them, while also requiring “that there are a sufficient number of females entering the career field and already assigned to the related commands and leadership positions.”
Where will these women come from? We couldn’t even get a solid 30 to try for OIC. Most who did dropped due to injury, and none were able to show they could match the men’s physical ability.
The only way to achieve “sufficient numbers” and make up for both higher injuries and weaker performance is to lower the standards. Not formally, of course, but the standards have been lowered every time more military jobs have been opened to women.
This policy decision also won’t really help women’s military careers, the entire foundation of the argument for putting women in combat. The real effect will more likely be to handicap them. Take a woman at the top of her field in a noncombat military occupational specialty and drop her in a combat unit with the highest performing males and you’ve just killed her career prospects. No matter the standards, men especially at this level will always outperform women, permanently relegating them at best to the bottom half of their units.
Carter’s decision will also likely result in less female representation in the ranks over time, presumably the opposite of what advocates for repeal want. Since the colossal majority of active-duty women say they don’t want to be assigned to these units — 92.5 percent of enlisted Army women according to a 2014 Army survey, with similar results in other branches surveyed — the female talent we’re told is so critical is likely to walk out the door. Young women considering joining, already five times harder and more expensive to recruit, are likely to be more deterred by the possibility of involuntary assignment.
There are star performers who can and have been used effectively and recognized for their achievements without integrating all-male units thus far. But you don’t make a policy with such broad negative consequences based on the performance of an unusual few who, no matter the standards, are at far higher risk.
The averages matter, and military women tending not to be able to perform at infantry standards and to be injured at more than twice the rate of men means that women in combat units are likely to have to be replaced at far higher rates. They will not be competitive with their male peers, and will leave the military sooner and with more life-long disabilities. Not to mention, we have to break hundreds of women just to get to one who can make the men’s minimums.
The story isn’t over. This was never Carter’s decision. It was and is the American people’s. Congress has it in its power to defund this effort through the next defense authorization bill, and the next president can reinstate exemption just as it was repealed, administratively. But not before much disruption is inflicted on our men and women in uniform who are now preparing to face ISIS in Syria. (For more from the author of “Combat Harms Women and Combat Effectiveness” please click HERE)
It means to be intellectually dyslexic and morally bankrupt.
Here is the view I have from where I sit just outside of Baltimore.
To begin with, we have the coalescence of an unprecedented number of national factors that threaten the security of American citizens.
There are record levels of immigration from the Middle East against the consent of the governed. Now there are countless numbers of homegrown and immigrant Islamic terrorists in our midst similar to the family of Saeed Farook, whose family members harbored anti-American sentiments.
There are almost a million illegal aliens that have been ordered deported, however they remain at large. In addition, there are 375,000 known criminal aliens at large who have been released into our cities.
The Department of Justice has embarked on a program to release 46,000 felons, including many violent drug dealers or those who have committed gun crimes. Additionally, Republicans and Democrats in Congress are working on legislation to retroactively release felons who have committed violent crimes with firearms.
Piled on to those disquieting national realities, anyone living in the Baltimore area has to contend with record high crime and homicides.
Naturally, any law abiding citizen of Maryland would want to exercise his or her Second Amendment right to protect himself and his family given the circumstances. But guess what?
Not only is concealed carry prohibited in Maryland (except for rare exceptions), as of October 1, 2013, but anyone desiring to even purchase or rent a handgun must obtain a Handgun Qualification License (HQL). This entails paying several hundred dollars for four hours of instruction, getting fingerprinted and monitored like a criminal by the state police. Only after that process does one enjoy the privilege of waiting potentially weeks to hear back from the police to even embark on purchasing a firearm for home defense.
While police officers are on trial for allegedly not putting a seat belt on a violent and belligerent drug dealer, a policy that was enacted only weeks before the alleged infraction, the city of Baltimore is burning. Thanks to the “space to destroy” that was afforded to the criminals, shootings have spiked 80% since last year. Baltimore is second only to St. Louis in the rate of homicides per capita for 2015. Robberies have increased sharply as well.
Consequently, after passing the most draconian gun laws in the nation, “shootings” in Baltimore have increased beyond belief and parts of the city look like Gaza. And yet liberals have the impertinence to suggest that law abiding gun owners are the problem and that we need stricter gun laws?
Now that liberals have made it so tedious for law abiding citizens to purchase a simple handgun and only violent criminals can get their hands on a firearm, Baltimore is experiencing the most homicides per capita since records were kept.
Law abiding residents of the Baltimore metropolitan area are staring down the barrel of the gun of mob rule that is expected to break out when the cops are inevitably exonerated – either in the trial court or upon appeal to the circuit court. And so many of them will be unable to properly defend their bodies while walking the streets and even in their homes.
If your blood is not already boiling, consider the following: earlier this year the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that illegal aliens, even those about to be deported, have standing to sue in federal court for gun rights. Also consider that, according to the courts, states have the power to pass laws prohibiting concealed carry and even limiting gun ownership – unalienable and foundational rights of our Constitution – yet those same states lack the power to pass marriage laws, even though marriage is not mentioned in the Constitution and is therefore left up to the states.
The perverted sense of justice and governance emanating from all levels of both our government and political class, coupled with the dyslexic debauchery endemic in our court system represents a fundamental threat to our democracy. Over a decade ago, conservative jurist Robert Bork warned that we were “Slouching Towards Gomorrah.”
Well, I’m here to tell you that we are no longer slouching towards Gomorrah. We are in it. (For more from the author of “Baltimore, Gun Control, and the Moral Bankruptcy of Liberalism” please click HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-12-10 01:43:472016-04-11 10:55:18Baltimore, Gun Control, and the Moral Bankruptcy of Liberalism
The Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, claiming that the U.S. faces its highest security threat since 9/11, on Wednesday put the blame for it and the rise of the Islamic State squarely on President Obama and his former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton.
“I would say that she and the president are responsible for ISIS rearing its ugly head. They have not effectively dealt with it and that’s going to be a huge campaign issue,” said Rep. Michael McCaul.
The Texas lawmaker said that Clinton failed early in her term as the nation’s top diplomat to handle the Iraq war and stem the resulting terrorism. He said that her policies “imploded Iraq and creates ISIS.” He spoke to reporters at a breakfast sponsored by the Christian Science Monitor.
And he said that the eventual Republican presidential nominee will use that to defeat Clinton. (Read more from “Security Committee Chair: Hillary, Obama to Blame for ISIS” HERE)
FBI Director James Comey told the Senate Judiciary Committee on Wednesday that one of two terrorists who tried to kill people outside a Prophet Muhammad cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, in May sent 109 messages to a terrorist overseas the day of the attack, and the FBI has no idea what was said, because those messages were encrypted.
“In May, when two terrorists attempted to kill a whole lot of people in Garland, Texas, and were stopped by law enforcement, again, that morning before one of those terrorists left to commit mass murder, he exchanged 109 messages with an overseas terrorist,” Comey said.
ISIS sent two gunmen – Elton Simpson and Nadir Soofi – to launch a terrorist attack at an anti-Muslim event on May 3, wounding a security guard before police shot them, the Associated Press reported. A third man – Abdul Malik Abdul Kareem – was arrested and charged with helping to orchestrate the attack. ISIS claimed responsibility for that attack.
“We have no idea what he said,” Comey said about one of the gunmen, “because those messages were encrypted, and to this day, I can’t tell you what he said with that terrorist 109 times the morning of that attack. That is a big problem. We have to grapple with it,” Comey said.
During his opening statement before the committee, Comey said both tech companies and the FBI care about safety on the Internet. They understand that “encryption is a very important part of being secure on Internet,” he said. “We also all care about public safety. We also all see a collision between those things right now.” (Read more from “FBI Director: Terrorist in Texas Attack Sent 109 Encrypted Messages on Morning of Attack to Terrorist Overseas” HERE)
https://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.png00Joe Millerhttps://joemiller.us/wp-content/uploads/logotext.pngJoe Miller2015-12-09 22:35:162016-04-11 10:55:18FBI Director: Terrorist in Texas Attack Sent 109 Encrypted Messages on Morning of Attack to Terrorist Overseas
