Burned on intel security deal

Probably people reading here would have heard some of this info before. But it is put together in a good article from AIM’s Cliff Kincaid.

Follow the intel trail of the CIA and its latest IT expansion. Just happening to award the contract to Bezos’ company over IBM, in spite of charging 54 million more than its big-blue competitor. The swamp has expanded.

The Washington Post, Amazon, and the Intelligence Community

by Cliff Kincaid on March 13, 2017 | AIM

One of The Washington Post’s big disclosures on Sunday was a front-page story about President Donald Trump’s choice of a cemetery. It was the latest contribution from reporter David A. Fahrenthold, whose job it is to probe every aspect of the life of the new President, no matter how esoteric and trivial. On the other hand, when it comes to covering the paper’s owner, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, and his ties to the CIA and the National Security Agency (NSA), the paper is AWOL. …/

Read http://www.aim.org/aim-column/the-washington-post-amazon-and-the-intelligence-community/

So, in view of all that, I’d say they need to either reopen that clouded bid or just cancel it outright and transfer the contract to IBM. I would trust them a lot more with this intel security than the Bezos startup. (and I’m not a big IBM fan) Deep State scored, bigly.

This cannot stand. We the people know when we’ve been burned, when we see it.

At the very least, where the hell are the hearings about it, the investigation, and the protest over conflict of interest? But then the company used the fact that it had this contract to further line its pockets and boost its credibility. Where’s the outrage?

I’m pretty sure there is even more filth and connections there than he touched on.

I’m offended by Muslims

Yes, you read that right. It’s not politically correct, you say? No, but it is correct to say. (Sorry Hillary, Obama, et al)

News for Muslims: I’m offended we have to sacrifice and fight this battle of Islamic terrorism. What are you doing? What have you done about it? Do you plan on doing anything about it? But our men, women, civilians, and soldiers are killed and maimed by this ideology, which happens to align itself with Islam and Muslims’ faith.

War with Islamists is a 100 year war, but also a permanent one. No one wants to think this is a permanent state of the world. It’s a way of life. Yet our leaders are crying and whining about global warming being a permanent condition of this world. They want us to change our entire lifestyle to reflect that reality their scientists’ claim. No, they demand we do.

I’m offended by Muslims. They all offend me, since they haven’t been able to stop ISIS or any of the other 100 plus terrorist groups. Have Muslims at large ever prevented or intercepted a terrorist plot? Even if they did it would only be one plot, one act. Can they show me a mosque or network that they shut down? No. Do they want us to police it?

But when France was attacked, a Muslim group ran out to say they condemned this act on the strongest possible terms. What’s that mean and what is that worth? Are they just going to come out every time and condemn the act? Are they also condemning ISIS for their existence? Sorry, I’m having a hard time qualifying their condemnation.

Yet they, Muslims and Islamists, tell us that the real problem is people like me that suggest the whole religion might be to blame. That’s the problem they are concerned about and that’s the problem they want all of America (everyone) to actively work on. They want our government stepping in to prevent that injustice. Their biggest worry is that their religion is being slandered somehow by the victims and citizens of the world.

Some people say they are afraid to speak out or come forward to criticize ISIS or Islamist radicals. Yet they are not afraid to come out to criticize us for “hating” on Islam. Isn’t Islamic terrorism giving Muslims a bad name? Wouldn’t you think they would be concerned about that enough to take a stand and do something to stop it? We’ve been waiting over 12 years now. It hasn’t happened and doesn’t look like it is going to happen. It has declared war on us and civilization. It is left to the world to deal with and combat it. That is insulting and offensive.

RightRing | Bullright

Secret agent man does Secret Service

This Secret Service mishap reads something like an episode of Secret Agent Man. We have the fence jumper and now another incident comes to light from Obama’s CDC visit. That on top of the other SS problems in the last couple years.

Okay, we know what happened but now the reaction. One hearing and it is almost unanimous Julia Pierson has to go. I never saw that much consensus for a firing before. Obama seemed to jump on the bandwagon.

“The president concluded that new leadership of that agency was required,” Earnest said.

That is the quickest firing Obama ever did. Funny about that. Think of all the scandals to hit the airwaves, and his promises to fix it, and the faux statements to hold people accountable. Then what happened? This time it’s “wham bam, thank you, mam.” You almost have to hit the slow motion button to see what happened.

Now today her resignation and deep regrets. That is almost predictable.

“I think it’s in the best interest of the Secret Service and the American public if I step down,” Pierson said. “Congress has lost confidence in my ability to run the agency. The media has made it clear that this is what they expected. … It’s painful to leave as the agency is reeling from a significant security breach.”

The resignation might sound boilerplate, but hold on for the DHS response from Secretary Jeh Johnson. Appoint an interim Director, call for a panel (committee) to study it, ask them if broader — agency wide — recommendations (reforms) are needed, and ask them to recommend who the next chief should be. (see his Statement) Say what?

I almost think she’s a scape goat. Now why would I think that? Excerpts from Johnson:

Today, I have also asked the Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Alejandro Mayorkas, aided by this Department’s General Counsel, to assume control and direction of the ongoing inquiry by the Secret Service of the fence jumping incident at the White House on September 19. Deputy Secretary Mayorkas should complete that review and submit findings to me by November 1, 2014.

Finally, I have also determined that scrutiny by a distinguished panel of independent experts of the September 19 incident and related issues concerning the Secret Service is warranted. The Panelists will be named shortly. By December 15, 2014, this panel will submit to me its own assessment and recommendations concerning security of the White House compound. I will also invite the panel to submit to me recommendations for potential new directors of the Secret Service, to include recommendations of individuals who come from outside the Secret Service. I will also request that the panel advise me about whether it believes, given the series of recent events, there should be a review of broader issues concerning the Secret Service.

Can you get all that big-government parsing? What panel is this that will choose who the next director should be? Does the Homeland Secretary not make any of his own decisions? Talk about loading something up with red-tape bureaucracy — not to mention the potential to politicize the process in a side show. What good will come from it? Confidence?

People expressed having no confidence in Pierson’s abilities, but who can have confidence in the process the Sec of Homeland Security laid out? Is this like some old “Get Smart” rerun? I’m waiting to see the shoe-phone ring with recommendations on what to do. Could he load that down with more bureaucracy? And that’s beside what Congress will say or do? Why does it raise even more questions about Johnson than Pierson’s leadership? That’s a Washington-style faith builder. At least it doesn’t revolve around Eric Holder.

RightRing | Bullright

DHS’s Elibiary moves on

Mohamed Elibiary has left the building

Frank Gaffney, Jr  | Center for Security Policy | September 5, 2014

Mohamed Elibiary, an Islamist with extensive ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and a record of influence operations in the service of its agenda, has announced his departure after five years on the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council. We can only hope that – at a moment when the danger posed by shariah-adherent Muslims is becoming more palpable by the day – the Department decided to stop legitimating an advisor who has publicly championed that it was, “ inevitable that ‘Caliphate’ return”, contended that the United States is “an Islamic country with an Islamically compliant constitution.”

Elibiary had always been brazen in his support for Islamists and the Muslim Brotherhood in particular, including featuring the Muslim Brotherhood “R4Bia” symbol on his twitter page, and publicly lauding Muslim Brotherhood ideologue Sayyid Qutb.

In 2011, Elibiary was also suspected of utilizing his security clearance in order to access confidential documents from the Texas Department of Public Safety, and seeking to “shop” the files to journalists in order to label then Presidential candidate Governor Rick Perry an “Islamophobe.” In May 2014, during testimony before Congress, DHS Secretary Jeh Johnson admitted to Representative Louie Gohmert (R-TX), that this was “problematic.”

Whatever the cause of Elibiary’s departure from a senior advisory capacity in the Obama administration, it must be welcomed because – as documented in the Center for Security Policy’s online, video-based course entitled The Muslim Brotherhood in America: The Enemy Within” (MuslimBrotherhoodinAmerica.com) – he played a prominent role in blinding the U.S. government to the threat posed by the Brotherhood’s “civilization jihad.”

Read more: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2014/09/05/mohamed-elibiary-has-left-the-building/


Certainly welcome news, but it is only about time. The recent inevitable caliphate statements may have finally pushed it over the top. Whatever the exact reasons, that he was such an advocate of Islamists should have caused his ouster long ago.  I am interested to see where he resurfaces.

Here is an ’09 interview where he told CNN that “institutions like Mosques or Islamic schools are not really conduits of radicalization.” And then Elibiary accuses “R-wingers” of misinterpreting his words. He went on to compare the radical appeal to that of the civil rights movement .

Illegal perceptions and border paranoia

Yes, what a difference a few years makes. In March 2011, Janet Napolitano made her screed about What border problems? — paraphrasing the titan of mistruth.

Remember when she uttered

“There is a perception that the border is worse now than it ever has been. That is wrong. The border is better now than it ever has been,” she said.

And El Paso Mayor John Cook said:

“The lie about border cities being dangerous has been told so many times that people are starting to believe it, but we as border communities have to speak out.”

Then she closed her case, right in El Paso, with this:

Numbers are in the right direction and dramatically so,” she said.

Still, she stressed that she didn’t come to El Paso “to run a victory lap” and that there “is much work to do.” — NBC reported.

Numbers in the right direction? That now would seem almost like a Freudian slip. My my, those skyrocketing numbers — in the right direction — especially since comrade Zero began exercising his executive pen. Now another border agent is murdered, and the family is even denied access to the arraignment.

Then, Napolitano said:

The perception that the violence in Mexico has spilled over to bordering U.S. cities is “wrong again,” Napolitano said. Violent crime rates have remained flat or decreased in border communities in the Southwest, she said.

That was also the same time that they were withdrawing the National Guard that were to shore up the border. Now what do we know about that time frame? How does this fit in with what happened in the last couple years? “Alex, I’ll take perception for a 100,000”.

RightRing | Bullright