Posts

FBI Believed Orlando Shooter Wouldn’t Go Postal

The FBI’s 2013 investigation of Orlando, Florida, club shooter Omar Mateen found that he was not thought to be a terrorist – nor was he believed to be capable of “going postal,” according to new documents released on Monday by Judicial Watch.

WND reported shortly after Mateen, 29, reportedly launched a mass shooting at a club in Orlando that left more than four dozen dead and at least as many wounded that he had been investigated by the FBI. He was killed in the attack.

Judicial Watch on Monday released documents that it obtained through a Freedom of Information Act process that included comments from the St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office quoting an FBI investigator.

These results followed complaints that Mateen, working for the private G4S security company as a guard in county facilities, had been commenting to sheriff’s deputies about terrorism and violence.

A sheriff’s officer wrote, “FBI concluded a several month long thorough investigation of one of our G4S employees, Omar Mateem, (sic) who works at the courthouse. Last night, I spoke with FBI SAC Rand Glass who informed me they believe this individual has been making comments about his capabilities via his alleged middle eastern terrorist contacts as a form of tit for tat – who is the biggest and baddest rhetoric. Reportedly, Mateem told FBI he did this because a deputy who no longer works at the courthouse kept calling him a ‘towel head.’ Mateem denied saying some things the FBI knows he did say. If he were smart he should not lie to them about any portion of the investigation (federal offense). They plan to speak to him again regarding the discrepancy. (Read more from “FBI Believed Orlando Shooter Wouldn’t Go Postal” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Get out of the Bunker, Conservatives! 8 Ways to Go on Offense Post-Orlando

How is it that Democrats have succeeded, following a series of terror attacks here and in Europe, in focusing the discussion on the inanimate objects used by the Islamic terrorists instead of the Islamic terrorists themselves? How could they get away with such absurdity, especially given the fact that Europe has an even worse terrorist problem, despite having even stricter gun laws than what Democrats are promoting?

The answer, of course, is the same as with every policy and media narrative: Republicans not only let them get away with it, they help validate, legitimize, and consummate their narratives and premises. This week Republicans in the Senate plan to focus solely on gun policy, thereby solidifying the veracity of the Democratic narrative that the problem and solution of terrorism revolves around gun policy. Meanwhile, Republicans are squandering the opportunity to go on offense and cut to the source of our security problems. They have agreed to conduct votes today on two Democratic gun control measures and will respond with two gun amendments of their own. With the federal government preventing law enforcement from identifying Islamic terrorists in our communities, are Republicans not capable of ensuring that the legislative agenda reflects a truthful narrative?

Here are the top eight initiatives Republicans can push that either speak directly to the specific terror attacks that have occurred in recent years or address the long-term systemic security concerns:

1. Defund CVE: The responsibility for not catching the Orlando terrorist, as well as several of the most recent high profile Islamic terrorists, is rooted in the Department of Homeland Security’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Agenda. Just before the terror attack, the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC), which is run by Muslim Brotherhood officials, posted a CVE memo directing agents to overlook any terrorist ties to Islam. It went so far as to direct law enforcement to “reject religiously-charged terminology and problematic positioning by using plain meaning American English.” Preventing Islamic terror attacks begins with identifying the enemy. That cannot be done as long as there is a fifth column within our own government committed to erasing all connections to the trail of terror. It is this agenda that is ensuring that local law enforcement is not only kept in the dark concerning homegrown Islamic terror threats, they are strong-armed into ignoring those threats with their own resources.

2. Ban the Muslim Brotherhood: Following up on number one, banning the Muslim Brotherhood would change the entire discussion and redirect the national focus from the weapons to the actual terrorists. By designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror group, Congress would be able to audit every member of these counterterrorism councils at DHS, DOJ, and State and root out anyone with ties to their umbrella organizations. In addition to parsing out the firefighters from the arsonists within our government, banishing the Muslim Brotherhood would help stem the tide of Islamic violent extremism in our communities. ISIS has only been around for three years, yet thousands of Muslims have been radicalized in our communities for several decades. The Muslim Brotherhood is the source for much of that radicalization. They control the mosques, write the textbooks for Muslim schools, and serve as chaplains in the prisons. A complete ban of this group would go a long way towards empowering those Muslims who want to assimilate without fear of intimidation.

3. Pause Refugee Resettlement: With Obama stepping on the gas pedal of refugee resettlement, Republicans could easily change the narrative from gun control to protecting our sovereignty and security. Americans do not want more Islamic refugees from the most volatile parts of the world when there is no way to engage in short-term or long-term vetting of these families. In addition, with record numbers of migrants from the Middle East, the only way to properly assimilate those already here into patriotic assimilation is to pause, or at least reduce, immigration from those countries for at least several years.

4. Allow States to Block Refugees: As we’ve noted, Obama has not followed the legal requirement to consult with states before resettling refugees within their respective jurisdictions. Nonetheless, the broken court system has allowed Obama to get away with this violation of federal law. Imagine if Republicans would submit an amendment empowering states to veto refugee resettlement within their borders? A number of Democrats would be placed on defense, as the people always like to decide questions that pertain to the character of their localities on a local level.

5. Strip ISIS Fighters of Citizenship: Isn’t it amazing how Democrats, such as Sen. Joe Manchin (WV), decry due process for Americans when it comes to gun rights, yet every one of them have opposed Ted Cruz’s effort to strip citizenship from ISIS fighters AFTER being convicted through full due process? There are roughly 250 known Americans who have attempted to join up with foreign terror groups. The fact that they have not been tried for treason is unconscionable. Why Mitch McConnell won’t bring Cruz’s bill (S. 247) to the floor is beyond comprehension.

6. Build the Border Fence: The southern border is not only open to Central Americans seeking jobs and welfare, it is potentially open to those fleeing the Middle East and obtaining asylum. As I’ve noted before, the asylum loophole is perhaps a bigger problem than our refugee policy. There are signs of Middle Easterners making the trip to South America for the purpose of declaring asylum at our southern border. Just last week, Judicial Watch reported that one such asylum-seeker was caught at the border carrying documents detailing the region’s gas pipelines. Isn’t it time we finally complete the 800-mile double-layered fence? Democrats would be hard pressed to oppose such an amendment at a time like this.

7. Enact Visa-Tracking: Even Democrats say they support the implementation of an Exit-Entry visa tracking system at our ports, yet they have dragged their feet on implementation since 1996. In 2015 alone, 527,000 foreign nationals overstayed their visas. A number of them are from Middle Eastern countries. We know this because in 2014, ABC News reported that DHS lost track of 58,000 foreign students (just one of the many visa categories) who have overstayed their visas, of which 6,000 presented a “heightened concern.” America admits a tremendous amount of foreign students from the Middle East. This has remained one of the most glaring holes in our security apparatus. Why won’t Republicans make Democrats go back on their word and oppose a consensus amendment to implement the first half of a visa tracking system by October?

8. Concealed Carry: Finally, if Republicans are committed to playing follow-the-leader with Democrats and focusing on guns, why not go on offense and propose concealed carry reciprocity? As witnessed by surging gun sales, Americans are embracing guns now more than ever. We need to show the American people that we are not going to disarm them in the face of global jihad. We are going to protect and promote their right to defend themselves by passing legislation that will allow them to carry their legally-owned firearms not just in their states of residence, but in whatever state or territory they may travel to. And while they are debating gun policy, what better way to embarrass Democrats than by blocking Obama’s continuous release of gun felons from prison?

It is unfathomable for Republicans to allow Democrats to bring in record numbers of dangerous terrorists, ignore their activity domestically, allow their leaders to craft our counter-terrorism policies… and then focus on the weapons used by those individuals? They should be conducting vote after vote on this week’s spending bill highlighting the pro-terrorist agenda of this administration.

For goodness sakes, this is the Justice Department spending bill we are dealing with this week. Republicans should have one hundred amendments prepared dealing with the malfeasances of Obama’s [In]Justice Department, over and beyond terrorism related amendments. They should be shutting down Obama’s war on cops, his assault on North Carolina, the rationally motivated law suits, and much more. But all they want to focus on is playing defense on gun control?

Republicans will also have an epic opportunity to provide Americans with a bold contrast during this week’s House markup of the annual funding bill for Homeland Security. Republicans can shut down Obama’s amnesty agenda, implement requisite security reforms, and ban CVE and the Muslim Brotherhood from the department. But will they?

Bunkers are the final redoubt of the defeated. They stink like fear, death, and cowardice. Real men leave the relative security of fortified walls, march through the gates and engage the enemy on the plains in decisive battle. Unfortunately, the Senate GOP is led by cowards. (For more from the author of “Get out of the Bunker, Conservatives! 8 Ways to Go on Offense Post-Orlando” please click HERE)

Listen to a recent interview with the author below:

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Orlando Panics as Mall Incident Spurs Evacuation, Fears of Attack

An incident at an Orlando shopping mall on Saturday revealed the fear and panic Orlando citizens are currently experiencing beneath the very thin veneer of calm.

Deputies were called to the Orlando Vineyard Premium Outlets at about 2 p.m.

“Preliminary investigation reveals it was a fight and people panicked,” Orange County Sheriff’s Office spokesperson Rose Silva said in a statement. “It is still early in the investigation and deputies are sorting everything out.

The panic ensued because the disturbance morphed into a shooting on social media. Some media reports said chairs being knocked over may have sounded like shots to those closest to the disturbance.

Although there was no evidence of a shooting, the Orange County Sheriff’s Office put the open air mall on lockdown while they conducted a sweep. About an hour after the lockdown was imposed, the mall was reopened.

The incident added to frayed nerves of Orlando residents.

Orlando has been rocked recently, first by the murder of singer Christina Grimmie on June 10, and then by the Sunday massacre of 49 people in the nation’s largest mass shooting. Orlando was also the sight of the death of a 2-year-old Nebraska boy killed by an alligator as he waded in a Disney resort lagoon.

“Tensions are high right now,” said Douglas Dobbs, owner of the Dobbs Funeral Home in Orlando, noting the community consciousness as the funerals of the victims are starting to take place. (For more from the author of “Orlando Panics as Mall Incident Spurs Evacuation, Fears of Attack” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What the New York Times Got Devastatingly Wrong About the Orlando Massacre

In an editorial, The New York Times viewed the massacre in Orlando as an example of hate against the LGBT community. The liberal newspaper blamed Republican efforts such as the North Carolina law that requires individuals to use the bathroom that corresponds to their sex at birth and “more than 200 anti-L.G.B.T. bills have been introduced in 34 states,” as factors that contributed to an atmosphere of bigotry conducive for violent reactions to gays and transgender people.

Nowhere in its 630 words did the article mention the fact that Omar Mateen was a Muslim and pledged his allegiance to ISIS – the terrorist group that executes homosexuals.

Instead, the editorial stated, “the precise motivation for the rampage remains unclear…”

Sadly, it’s not just the New York Times that is jumping on the chance to blame anyone and anything BUT the real enemy. Democratic politicians, the media and progressive organizations avoided blaming the ISIS-inspired mass shooting on radical Islam. Instead, they point fingers at guns and supposed bias against the LGBT community by Republicans and Christian conservatives.

Speaking from the Oval Office about the shooting, President Obama emphasized the attack was not “part of a larger plot,” and added that the motivation behind the shooting was unknown.

And as usual, Obama then pivoted to guns saying, “We are also going to have to think about the risks we are willing to take by being so lax in how we make very powerful firearms available to the people in this country.”

Reacting to the shooting, and acting as Obama’s puppets, Senate Democrats pushed for gun control measures following the attack. Democrats launched a filibuster to force votes on preventing gun sales to individuals on a terrorist watch list and measures to tighten background checks.

In a tweet, Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) proudly announced his filibuster accomplishment.

Democrat’s intense focus on guns and refusal to address ISIS drew criticism from Carl Higbie, former Navy SEAL and author of Enemies Foreign and Domestic: A SEAL’s Story. According to Higbie, Democrats are exploiting the terrorist attack to advance their progressive political agenda on guns and to protect Obama and Hillary Clinton from their foreign policy failure to defeat ISIS.

“Many on the left are jumping on this tragedy as a chance to push the same agenda they have been pushing for years. They also do not want to admit that their failed foreign policy could have in any way contributed to this,” said Higbie in an interview with Conservative Review. He added, “This is a scapegoat to not link Hillary Clinton to the influence of ISIS.”

Higbie believes the focus needs to be on the radical ideology and not the objects used in attacks noting, “No one blamed Boeing for the planes hitting the towers. We must not blame the objects, we must blame the ideology that possesses people to use them for evil.”

Amanda Marcotte, writing for Salon, criticized conservatives for citing radical Islam as the cause for the violent attack and added there isn’t a difference between Christianity and Islam regarding violence.

In tweets, ACLU attorneys added to the liberal view that avoided linking the terrorist attack to ISIS and went further by directly blaming the “Christian Right” for the attack citing the 200 anti-LGBT bills that were introduced this year.

Think Progress, a progressive policy group, said Christian views toward the LGBT community are as violent as radical Islam. Yes, you read that right.

Abraham Hamilton III, a public policy analyst for the American Family Association, a Christian and family values organization, was dismayed over the blame being assigned to Christians and believes it’s dangerous to not identify ISIS as the true cause of the attack.

“The speed with which some have turned their ire onto Christianity, as a result of this tragedy, [is] appalling and astounding. It’s sickening how quickly some are willing to politicize the death of some many,” Hamilton said in an interview with Conservative Review.

Hamilton believes there is no ambiguity regarding Mateen’s motivation since the murderer called 911 and pledged his allegiance to ISIS and its leader, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, and reportedly yelled “Allahu Akbar” during the shooting.

Additionally, Hamilton noted that disagreement over an issue does not equate animus against others. He pointed out that Chick-Fil-A, the restaurant founded by Christians and normally closed on Sundays, opened last Sunday to serve food and drinks for the people waiting in line in Orlando to donate blood for the victims of the attack.

Finally, Hamilton is concerned about the failure of Obama and The New York Times to identify ISIS as an organization responsible for the attack especially science ISIS claimed responsibility for the shootings at the Pulse nightclub.

Hamilton concluded, “Failure or unwillingness to identify those who seek to destroy us puts our citizens more at risk of danger.”

Unlike the 911 attack by Al Qaeda that unified the nation against a common enemy, the response to the terrorist attack in Orlando is split between ideological lines. (For more from the author of “What the New York Times Got Devastatingly Wrong About the Orlando Massacre” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Father of Orlando Victim Wishes Son Had Been Armed

A common refrain from gun-rights activists following any kind of mass shooting is that if somebody else had been armed during the shooting, the shooter could have been stopped much earlier.

In the wake of the tragic mass shooting at a gay club in Orlando that killed 49 and wounded 53, one of the people coming forward to make this claim is Mark Allen Bando, whose son was one of the victims.

Calling into Sean Hannity’s radio show show Monday, Bando, who is a retired Detroit police officer said, “His mom talked to him on the phone that evening before he went to the club, so she knew he was going. When she woke up Sunday morning and heard there’d been a massacre there, she went over there — she hadn’t heard from him so she feared the worst — and just today they finally told us that he was one of the victims that was killed at the scene. He never even made it to the hospital.”

Bando went on to say that he wishes more Americans would arm themselves to protect against madmen like Omar Mateen, the Orlando shooter.

“There is a simpler solution, as Donald Trump has said many times, if you have somebody shooting back, the game’s over,” he said. “When the shooting started there wasn’t one person in there that wouldn’t have traded everything he owned in the world to have a loaded gun. But these people don’t realize it until they’re in a situation that’s far too late.”

Bando’s son, who lived in Orlando, had just turned 32 on June 1.

“He lived down there and I lived up here and I never got a chance to teach him how to handle firearms,” Bando said. “I think if we’d have lived in closer proximity, he would have become proficient. He probably would’ve gotten a [concealed pistol license] and carried a gun and that could’ve made a difference last night.” (For more from the author of “Father of Orlando Victim Wishes Son Had Been Armed” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Obama yet to Contact Florida Governor in Wake of Orlando Terrorist Attack

Following the nation’s worst mass shooting incident and its worst terrorist attack since 9/11, President Obama has yet to contact Florida Gov. Rick Scott over the tragedy and coordinate on matters of security.

Instead, the administration opted to contact Scott via a White House staffer, which seems to be a break from traditional White House protocol in the wake of state disasters.

Gov. Scott confirmed this in a Fox News interview with Brian Kilmeade on Tuesday, followed by Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi, who expressed her frustration.

“This isn’t about politics right now. This is about Americans,” said Bondi. “I believe he should have reached out to the governor of the state of Florida, and he hasn’t.”

Asked whether she was disappointed in Obama’s decision not to contact state officials, Bondi replied, “Of course we are.”

Both Bondi and Scott have endorsed Donald Trump for president, which may, in part, explain why the president has opted not to reach out.

Whatever the reason, the governor said he was “fed up” with the administration’s attitude, citing federal failure to share intelligence information, specifically as it pertains to terrorism suspects.

“I’m responsible for the security of the people in my state,” said Scott. “I’m fed up with the fact that we’re not destroying ISIS, we’re not vetting these people, and we’re not taking care of our own citizens.”

“What about our security, right?” asked Scott.

Picking up the slack, former president George W. Bush decided to contact Scott directly over the tragedy and offer his condolences.

“He said he and Laura are praying for us and anything he could do, he would love to be helpful,” Scott said.

Trump also reached out to Scott asking how he was doing and offering the governor his prayers. (For more from the author of “Obama yet to Contact Florida Governor in Wake of Orlando Terrorist Attack” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

In the Wake of Orlando, New Gun Control Legislation May Be on the Horizon

CNN is reporting a possible new deal on gun control legislation may be in the works between members of GOP leadership and Democrats.

Specifically, Senators Dianne Feinstein and John Cornyn may be the driving force behind the legislation, which would seek to suspend Second Amendment rights for those on government watch lists.

“According to the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., the legislation would allow the attorney general to block individuals suspected of having terrorist ties from buying a gun. The legislation also includes an appeals process for those individuals who may argue they were wrongly targeted,” read a report from Talking Points Memo.

“Our priority this week should be this terrorist gap measure because it is linked so directly to the issue of terrorism and extremist violence in this nation and abroad,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn.

The renewed call to suspend the rights of those on government watch lists comes after it was revealed that Orlando shooter Omar Mateen, who carried out the deadliest terrorist attack since 9/11, was on such a list.

Ironically, Mateen was interviewed twice by the FBI and subsequently removed from the list after he was cleared of suspicion.

Opponents of this sort of legislation point out it would be a violation of the Constitution to suspend rights without due process and a fair trail, adding that the real issue is a politically correct culture, which prevents intelligence officers from doing their jobs properly.

Furthermore, there are concerns that such lists could be used to target and punish political rivals, specifically veterans and conservatives, as the administration has expressed contempt for these groups in the past.

According to a widely criticized security assessment by the Department of Homeland Security, conservatives, and even returning veterans, are susceptible to extremism and therefore should be watched.

“Let me be very clear — we monitor the risks of violent extremism taking root here in the United States,” said Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano. “We don’t have the luxury of focusing our efforts on one group; we must protect the country from terrorism whether foreign or homegrown, and regardless of the ideology that motivates its violence.” (For more from the author of “In the Wake of Orlando, New Gun Control Legislation May Be on the Horizon” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Sources Say Major Arrest Likely in Connection to Orlando Shooting

As federal investigators continue piecing together the events leading up to the nation’s deadliest mass shooting, one name continues to surface as a possible accessory to the heinous crime.

While the FBI has identified 29-year-old Omar Mateen, killed by the police at the scene, as the man who opened fire in an Orlando gay night club early Sunday morning, agents believe his wife might be the key to learning more about his motives.

According to developing reports Tuesday, Noor Salman has cooperated with authorities thus far in their investigation into her husband’s actions. Some of what she has revealed, however, has led agents to believe she might have had advanced notice of Mateen’s murderous plans.

Such knowledge, if confirmed, could result in scores of accessory charges against her. Reports indicate the chances are high that she will be arrested in connection with the shooting that left 49 dead and dozens more injured.

Fox News cited multiple sources who confirmed Salman revealed during an interview with investigators that Mateen told her he intended to commit an act of violence. Furthermore, the gunman might have called his wife from Pulse — the nightclub he targeted — during the rampage.

Salman, with whom Mateen reportedly had a 3-year-old son, also reportedly revealed that she joined her husband when he purchased firearms shortly before the shooting.

As Western Journalism previously reported, Salman is believed to have driven Mateen to Pulse before the shooting as he scouted potential locations for the attack. (For more from the author of “Sources Say Major Arrest Likely in Connection to Orlando Shooting” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Ex-Wife Says Orlando Shooter Was Gay, FBI Told Her to Keep Quiet About His Sexual Orientation

The ex-wife of Orlando mass killer Omar Mateen claimed Monday that she believed he was homosexual — as it was revealed that he frequented the gay nightclub where he staged the nation’s worst massacre in modern times.

Sitora Yusufiy, who was married to Mateen in 2009 for three months, made the shocking claim on Brazilian television station SBT Brazil.

Her fiancé, Marco Dias, speaking in Portuguese on her behalf, said Yusufiy believed that Mateen had “gay tendencies” and that his father had called him gay in front of her. Dias also claimed “the FBI asked her not to tell this to the American media.”

The bombshell came as a male former classmate of Omar Mateen said he had been asked out romantically by the mass killer, who reportedly was a virtual regular at the Pulse nightclub, having visited it more than a dozen times over the years. (Read more from “Ex-Wife Says Orlando Shooter Was Gay, FBI Told Her to Keep Quiet About His Sexual Orientation” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Was the Orlando Gunman Really a Lone Wolf?

A shooting by a lone Muslim gunman at an Orlando gay nightclub, which has left at least 50 people dead and dozens more injured, has been called an “act of terrorism” by law enforcement agencies.

The shooter, Omar Mateen, opened fire on hundreds of people at Pulse nightclub, then took hostages until police crashed an armored vehicle into the building and killed him in a gunfight. Mateen was a U.S.-born citizen, whose parents were born in Afghanistan. According to law enforcement officials, Mateen had been “on the radar” of U.S. officials for some time.

The FBI says it is looking at all angles to find a motive. “We do have suggestions that that individual may have leanings towards that particular ideology [Islamic extremism]. But right now we can’t say definitively, so we’re still running everything around,” said Ron Hopper, FBI assistant agent in charge of the FBI’s Tampa division.

The immediate reaction from many news pundits has been to downplay any possible connections to radical Islamism. As often happens after these terrorist attacks, including those in Paris and San Bernardino, pundits and politicians are quick to point out that a “lone wolf” doesn’t necessarily get direct orders from ISIS. They focus on the “hate crime” angle or the need for gun control instead of putting the attack in the context of a global jihad.

Just this morning on Fox News Sunday, columnist George Will, indignant of any suggestion at this time that the attack was motivated by Islamic extremism, said the idea of international terrorists giving Mateen directives to shoot up a gay nightclub was preposterous.

Will, like so many others, are simply perpetuating ignorance when it comes to how lone wolves operate. As has been outlined by the Institute for the Study of War, ISIS has a global strategy to carry out attacks against infidels, and lone wolves are essential to that strategy.

This was made clear in 2014 when the chief spokesman for the Islamic State called on supporters throughout the world to act on their own initiative to attack Western targets.

As reported by McClatchy DC in June 2014, Islamic State spokesman Abu Mohammed al Adnani “vowed that the group would kill Western men and enslave their women even as he accused the Western news media of distortion by inaccurately portraying the group as violent.”

“If you can kill a disbelieving American or European – especially the spiteful and filthy French – or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way, however it may be,” Adnani said, according to an English translation posted online by al Furqan Media, the communications arm of the Islamic State.

“Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict,” he said. “Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling.”

A similar directive was later given to women throughout the world. As I reported at The Federalist after the San Bernardino terrorist attack, guidelines had been released by Islamic State leaders, saying they “can fight without the permission of others.”

Counterterrorism expert Sebastian Gorka has pointed out repeatedly that there is really no such thing as a lone wolf—that they’re actually “known wolves.”

It’s time to “ditch” the “lone wolf” label, Gorka told Fox News, because it obscures the ideology that ties all independent American jihadists together.

“This is a global network of jihadi activists,” Dr. Gorka explained, noting that the “lone wolf” label– applied to a number of Islamist shooters, from Fort Hood’s Nidal Hasan to Chattanooga’s Mohammad Abdulazeez–“is designed to make us think these are sporadic, disconnected individuals– they’re not.” The label “is designed to disconnect the dots,” he explains, as many of these individuals are watching similar, if not identical, Islamist propaganda online. In reality, “They are all connected by the ideology, by the stuff they consume on the internet,” Dr. Gorka explained.

Gorka said the State Department has failed to crack down on Islamist propaganda online—where many American Muslims are recruited—because they ignore that this is about an ideology: radical Islam. We aren’t fighting “extremism” or “terrorism,” Gorka has said. We are fighting people who hold to a particular ideology, which means supporters of the Islamic State don’t need direct orders every time an attack is made against Western targets—civilian or military.

The attack on a gay nightclub is in complete alignment with the ideology of radical Islam. Homosexuality is illegal according to Sharia Law and is punishable by death. Men who have fled the Middle East testify to this fact and have spoken to the United Nations Security Council about the horror of being gay in the Islamic State.

“In my society, being gay means death,” said one Iraqi man, hiding his identity out of fear for his safety.

Another man, Subhi Nahas, said he watched as a group linked to al-Qaeda took control of his hometown of Idlib and systematically tortured and murdered of men who were thought to be gay.

“I was terrified to go out,” he said. “Nor was my home safe, as my father, who suspiciously monitored my every move, had learned I was gay. I bear a scar on my chin as a token of his rage. At the executions, hundreds of townspeople, including children, cheered jubilantly as at a wedding. If a victim did not die after being hurled off a building, the townspeople stoned him to death.”

Given that the Islamic State has already given directives for global jihad, and that supporters are motivated by a shared ideology, it makes logical sense that a “known wolf,” as we seem to have in Orlando, would target a gay nightclub, killing 50 souls who were doing nothing but minding their own business with friends and loved ones. (For more from the author of “Was the Orlando Gunman Really a Lone Wolf?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.