Here is the background: Ali Muhammad Brown was charged with executing two gay men in Seattle. Brown was previously prosecuted federally following an FBI probe into an Islamic group suspected of supporting jihadists overseas.
This devout Muslim is also a registered sex offender for crimes against a 6-year-old girl, the same age as Aisha when Muhammad married her.
He was previously prosecuted as part of a federal investigation into a sleeper cell thought by investigators to be linked to a terrorism funding organization. “One prominent member of the group is thought to have been killed waging jihad in Somalia after fleeing prosecution in the United States.”
The reporter of this horrible double slaying does not connect the dots.
Seattle has a problem. They won’t run our ads highlighting Muslim oppression of gays, despite this savage reality. If you recall, a devout Muslim set fire to a packed Seattle gay bar during a New Year’s celebration shortly after midnight on January 1. Seattle’s largest and longest-running gay nightclub was doused in gasoline and set aflame by Musab Masmari. He was arrested on his way to the airport.
Where are the left-wing, the gay and LGBT organizations denouncing the Islamic texts that inspire such mayhem and murder of gays? Where is that fierce gay leadership condemning Muslim oppression of gays under the sharia? The silence is deafening.
They were loud and proud against our ads. They were holding press conferences condemning me. Gay organizations in America say nothing, but loudly condemned my ad campaign highlighting Muslim oppression of gays under the sharia. Why haven’t we heard from this City Council, or this Human Rights Commission, SFHRC head Theresa Sparks, but most especially the enemedia that scrubs their coverage of motive? They called our ads hate and issued a resolution condemning our AFDI ad campaign (the first of its kind) against our organization for merely quoting Muslim political leaders, spiritual leaders and cultural voices in the Muslim community who call for the torture and death of gay people.
“Seattle man charged with murder, terrorism in New Jersey,” Associated Press, July 2, 2015:
NEWARK, N.J. (AP) – A Seattle man was indicted on murder and terrorism charges Thursday for allegedly shooting a New Jersey college student last year in a fit of rage over the U.S. government’s role in the Middle East, which authorities said is the first time a terror charge has been brought in the state in connection with a murder case.
Ali Muhammad Brown, 30, fatally shot Brendan Tevlin while the 19-year-old was stopped at a traffic light in northern New Jersey, authorities said.
Brown also faces three aggravated murder charges in Seattle, where authorities said last year the killings were part of a crusade to punish the U.S. government for its foreign policies.
Authorities said in court documents filed in Seattle last year that Brown described himself to detectives after his New Jersey arrest as a strict Muslim who was angry with the U.S. government’s role in Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan because of the death of innocent civilians and children.
“The defendant was on a bloody crusade, executing four innocent men … with the same murder weapon, over the course of approximately two months, and all under the common and single scheme of exacting ‘vengeance’ against the United States government for its foreign policies,” prosecutors said.
Tevlin was shot multiple times on June 25, 2014 as he stopped at a traffic light in West Orange on his way home to Livingston, roughly five or 10 minutes away. Tevlin was home after completing his freshman year at the University of Richmond. At the time, Brown had been a fugitive for three weeks after authorities in Seattle identified him as a suspect in the slayings of two men early on the morning of June 1.
Brown was arrested in woods not far from the site of Tevlin’s killing, in an area that includes a golf course and the South Mountain Reservation, a 2,000-acre park in the center of Essex County.
At the time of Brown’s arrest, Murray said results of ballistics tests from the Tevlin shooting were put into a national database and matched with the gun that was used in the Seattle murders. Authorities said they picked up Brown’s trail after an alleged robbery and attempted carjacking in Point Pleasant on June 29, four days after Tevlin was killed.
The prosecutor’s office announced Thursday it had dropped charges in the Tevlin slaying against West Orange residents Eric Williams and Jeremy Villagran, who were charged along with Brown.
In the New Jersey case Brown is also charged with felony murder, carjacking, robbery and multiple weapons offenses.
An attorney representing Brown didn’t return a phone message left after hours Thursday.
Conservative radio talk show star, Mark Levin, brought the house down during the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). He minced no words in smashing Obama’s executive orders, immigration, and ISIS.
Levin opened with a GREAT quote by Thomas Paine:
“We, not you, we own that constitution, we own this country, and you, Mr. Obama, do not have any legitimate authority to fundamentally transform what does not belong to you.”
He then addressed the immigration problem:
“We are not a nation of immigrants we are a nation of citizens. A nation of immigrants who have become citizens. We are a nation of citizens and I’m sick and tired of the American citizen being demeaned and treated as a second class citizens while anyone who crosses the border is treated as the most virtuous human being on the face of the earth.”
Regarding ISIS….KILL THEM!
Here’s the real agenda they don’t want you to know
Physical access to gold demanded as economy weakens
Texas is the only state that owns an actual stockpile of gold, according to public sector and financial industry experts – not just gold futures or investment positions, but approximately 5,600 gold bars worth around $650 million. The holdings, stored at a New York bank, for some harken back to century-old fears about the security of currency not backed by shiny bullion.
The Legislature’s decision this summer to bring its gold cache home was hailed by many conservatives, and even some on the far left, who are suspicious of national government.
“There will always be the exact same amount of gold in there as the amount that was put in,” no matter what happens to the financial system, said Republican state Rep. Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, a former tea party organizer from the Dallas suburbs who authored the gold bill
But for the Texas comptroller’s office, which has to implement the policy, the catch is that the new Texas Bullion Depository exists in name but not reality.
The law doesn’t say where the depository would be or how it should be built or secured. No funding was provided for those purposes or for leasing space elsewhere. Further complicating matters is a provision allowing ordinary people to check their own gold or silver bullion into the facility.
“We are honestly at the phase where the questions we are answering are creating more questions that we have to answer,” said Chris Bryan, a comptroller’s office spokesman.
Charged with figuring everything out is a four-member task force within the comptroller’s office, which recently dispatched an official to a precious metals conference to study up.
One immediate concern is the possible cost. When Fort Knox was completed in 1936 it cost $560,000 – or roughly $9.2 million in today’s dollars. When Capriglione first introduced his bill in 2013 it had an estimated cost of $23 million.
But Capriglione now thinks private companies would bid to create a depository in exchange for charging storage and service fees.
The plan has kicked up chatter outside of Texas that it’s a step toward secession, an idea raised now and then on the state’s farthest political fringe.
“Just moving it would be pretty expensive and, unless Texas is anticipating withdrawing from the union, which I suspect is some peoples’ want, I don’t see what advantage it is…,” said Edwin Truman, a senior fellow at the Washington-based Peterson Institute for International Economics who has written about gold and monetary policy. “What are you getting for what you’re paying for?”
But Capriglione says he’s just convinced that gold is safer, especially close at hand.
After the bill sailed through the Legislature, Republican Gov. Greg Abbott signed it and Tweeted: “California may be the golden state, but Texans deserve to keep their gold in-state!”
Texas’ state-owned gold is held by the University of Texas Investment Management Company, the nation’s second largest academic endowment behind Harvard. It began gradually amassing gold futures in 2009 as a hedge against currency weakness in the recession. It eventually transitioned to physical bullion, and by 2011 had $1 billion worth.
The price of gold has since mostly slumped amid a soaring stock market. Today, the fund’s gold bars represent about 2.5 percent of its $25.4 billion in holdings, said Chief Executive Officer Bruce Zimmerman.
Asked about the new depository, Zimmerman said, “We don’t do politics. We’re just investors.”
The Fed declined comment on the new Texas depository, as did HSBC bank, which currently stores the gold bars in an underground vault in Manhattan.
Stacked together, the state’s gold occupies about 20 square feet. It’s unclear whether repatriating it could be done with an electronic transfer or would require a fleet of planes or armored cars.
One possible effect of the new depository might be more attention to the idea of returning to the gold standard, long a cause of former Texas Rep. Ron Paul. The Federal Reserve was founded more than a century ago so that the value of the U.S. dollar no longer had to be anchored to gold, and Richard Nixon formally scrapped the gold standard in 1971.
“I think Texas is once again showing they’re ahead of the curve,” said James Rickards, author of the 2014 book “The Death of Money: The Coming Collapse of the International Monetary System.” “They’re not waiting for the disaster, but preparing for it.”
BY ED MORRISSEY
Democrats have insisted that the House Select Committee on Benghazi has done nothing but rehash already-known elements of the attack on the consulate in September 2012, and intended to do nothing more than embarrass Hillary Clinton. The latest move by the Obama administration to block access to some State Department documentation undermines both claims. Byron York reports at the Washington Examiner that the State Department has withheld an undisclosed number of documents to protect “important executive branch institutional interests” — code for executive privilege:
The State Department has informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi that it is withholding “a small number” of documents from investigators on the basis of “important executive branch institutional interests.” The statement, made in a letter from Assistant Secretary of State Julia Frifield to committee chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy, amounts to a de facto claim of executive privilege.
Frifield made the claim in a letter turning over 3,600 pages of Benghazi-related documents from three current and former administration officials: Susan Rice, Jake Sullivan, and Cheryl Mills. Rice, a former United Nations ambassador, is now national security adviser, while Sullivan and Mills are close aides to Hillary Clinton who worked at the Department when she was secretary of state. …
State has insisted on certain restrictions before turning over its documents, including those from Rice, Sullivan, and Mills. “Under the terms of this agreement, the documents are being provided without the majority of Department redactions that would normally be applied to protect national security, law enforcement, and diplomatic efforts of the United States, as well as the safety and privacy of the individuals named herein,” Frifield wrote to Gowdy. “In return, the Benghazi Committee has agreed that, in the event that it considers it integral to the satisfaction of the Benghazi Committee’s mandate to release any of these documents publicly, it will first give the State Department a reasonable opportunity of at least five days to review the documents proposed to be released and to discuss with the Benghazi Committee any sensitive information the Department believes should be redacted prior to the public release. The Benghazi Committee has agreed to consider such requests in good faith prior to making any such release.”
The letter itself notes that State has not disclosed documents related to Libya policy. The scope of the select committee’s look at the entirety of the Obama administration’s handling of Libya in the post-Arab Spring period, Frifield admits, has forced it to produce new documentation. And they don’t want to comply:
This is what’s known as trying to eat your cake and have it too. Democrats, let by ranking member Elijah Cummings, have repeatedly claimed that the select committee is unnecessary and redundant on the point of the attack itself. Chair Trey Gowdy has repeatedly stated that the scope of the committee goes far beyond the attack, to review of the policies that led the consulate to be vulnerable and State and the military unprepared to deal with the consequences. This response tries an even narrower argument than Cummings uses by claiming the ARB provided a definitive answer to the attack, which is (a) absurd and (b) beside the point. Congress has the right and the duty to oversee all government-agency functions and performance, and not just in the case of an attack.
The invocation of executive privilege raises the stakes. Executive privilege only covers the President, and his immediate advisers while they are being consulted by the President in an area of executive authority. Susan Rice, Obama’s national-security adviser, would be covered by executive privilege only when in consultation with the President, but not when she’s consulting with Hillary Clinton or officials at other agencies over which Congress exercises oversight. Otherwise, the use of the privilege would get so abused as to render any sort of checks and balances on the executive moot.
A resort to executive privilege in this case either suggests that Barack Obama himself got involved in dealing with these issues as they arose and that documentation would expose the debate over policy and responses … or that the White House simply thinks it can use executive privilege at any time to block access to records to which Congress is entitled. The use of executive privilege to protect Eric Holder in the Operation Fast and Furious probe provides evidence of the latter. This looks like a blanket attempt to stifle the Select Committee in the same way that Holder managed to stall out the probe into ATF/Department of Justice actions in the gun-running scandal. At the very least, though, that allows Gowdy to keep the probe running and make the point that it’s the White House stretching it out with their refusal to cooperate and share material that even administration officials admit they’ve never provided to Congress.