June 16, 2016

"ISIL has a large cadre of Western fighters who could potentially serve as operatives for attacks in the West."

"And the group is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel... Unfortunately, despite all our progress against ISIL on the battlefield and in the financial realm, our efforts have not reduced the group's terrorism capability and global reach.... The resources needed for terrorism are very modest, and the group would have to suffer even heavier losses of territory, manpower and money for its terrorist capacity to decline significantly.... In fact, as the pressure mounts on ISIL, we judge that it will intensify its global terror campaign to maintain its dominance of the global terrorism agenda."

Says CIA Director John Brennan in a statement he will deliver to the Senate Intelligence Committee this morning.

61 comments:

Curious George said...

Wait, Trumphitler is right?

Robert Cook said...

They never get tired of shouting "Boo!" to scare the rabble and justify greater appropriations for military and intelligence expenditures--enriching the weapons and intelligence-systems providers at our expense--and to justify any unilateral and unconstitutional or unlawful actions they may decide to take, whether inside or outside our national borders.

Always go with what works!

Michael K said...

Well, we know that at least one arrived with the plans for the gas pipeline of a town.

Nothing to see here.

The gas pipeline plans in the woman’s possession include the Deming region, law enforcement sources say. Deming is a Luna County city situated about 35 miles north of the Mexican border and 60 miles west of Las Cruces. It has a population of about 15,000.

Just one of Cookie's "intelligence system providers" but for the other side.

CJinPA said...

...a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel... Unfortunately, despite all our progress against ISIL on the battlefield and in the financial realm...

"...our policy of allowing millions of their countrymen to enter Western nations seems to make it harder to track down the terrorists among them. I'm at a loss as to how we can improve our odds, other than ramping up the police state a few more notches."

madAsHell said...

Obama's legacy will be...."because that is not who we are".

Curious George said...

Just take away their Kobe jerseys. Or something.

rhhardin said...

They depend on the media and terroriism entertainment market for their clout.

The media and the terrorists are in business together.

Otherwise you'd only have to watch out for large groups acting on a big damage plan, which can be done.

rhhardin said...

You could put bouncers at the border instead of at the club.

Pookie Number 2 said...

They never get tired of shouting "Boo!" to scare the rabble and justify greater appropriations for military and intelligence expenditures

Cook's right. Only paranoid people would worry about something as unlikely as an ISIS advocate killing 50 people at a nightclub. That would never happen.

The Drill SGT said...

Six months in, President Barack Obama's goal of resettling 10,000 Syrian refugees in the United States by the end of the fiscal year is in serious jeopardy.

but, but, we are assured that we can fully vet all these refugees (mostly young men).....

amielalune said...


madAsHell: As far as I'm concerned, Obama is CERTAINLY not "who we are" and has no freaking business proclaiming "who we are." I don't give a rat's you-know-what about anything he says.

The Drill SGT said...

"The branch in Libya is probably the most developed and the most dangerous," Brennan says, echoing concerns by other security officials that Libya's close proximity to Europe is a problem.

good thing Hillary's "regime change" and Obama's "leading from behind" has worked out so well in Libya to turn that dictatorship into a beacon of freedom, democracy and progress. Just ask our Ambassador...

Robert Cook said...

Pookie Number 2: If the grotesque murderous acts of unbalanced loner malcontents with legally obtained automatic weapons were seen by Washington as an existential threat, why haven't they reacted as such to any of the many (and proliferating) violent eruptions by such cranks over the past two or more decades? Americans kill more Americans than ISIL terrorists ever will.

Gusty Winds said...

Is he going to talk about hate crimes too?

Ron Winkleheimer said...

And the group is probably exploring a variety of means for infiltrating operatives into the West, including refugee flows, smuggling routes, and legitimate methods of travel.

Wow, somebody should come up with a pithy statement about hiding among the population. Guerrillas and fish and water? I'll have to work on it.

The CIA might as well put out a statement saying that water is wet.

Gusty Winds said...

He could save everyone a lot of time and cut down the length of the speech a little.

You know, take a lesson from Hemmingway; short sentences.

Honorable Members of Congress. We're fucked. Are there any questions?"

Ron Winkleheimer said...

existential threat

You know, the IRA wasn't an existential threat to the United Kingdom, but it still managed to kill a lot of people.

MayBee said...

But Obama was very scoldy the other day, telling us pretty much the opposite.

MayBee said...

If only we could figure out the common thread the ISIS leaders were using to try to motivate fighters both directly and indirectly.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Cook,
It WASN'T AN AUTOMATIC WEAPON!! Do you not pay attention? (He asked rhetorically.)

MayBee said...

Instead of addressing any of this, we have to hear about gun control measures which would have stopped ZERO of the mass shootings.

sinz52 said...

The ONLY reason why ISIL still exists at all is because Obama and his liberal supporters are squeamish about civilian casualties. They faint if a Middle Easterner gets so much as a hangnail from U.S. bombs.

The Obama Administration admitted that they won't let the oil trucks supplying ISIL with oil revenue be bombed, just because those trucks are being driven by civilians.

Obama has taken direction from the hard-left intelligentsia like the Institute for Policy Studies, which has stated it won't support any U.S. military action anywhere unless the U.S. can guarantee that not even ONE civilian will be hurt.

Liberals of an earlier era weren't like that. FDR had no problem ordering U.S. B-17 bombers to bomb German factories and cities despite all the civilians present. And Truman made the decision to drop the A-bomb on Japan. Twice.

As a result of today's liberal squeamishness, we now have 49 civilian casualties anyway: Americans in Orlando.

Robert Cook said...

Exhelodrvr1:

I'm speaking generally, and not specifically just about the most recent imbalanced loner malcontent with murderous intent. Others have had automatic weapons; future others also will have them. The weaponry is not the point, but the actions and the actors.

sinz52 said...

Robert Cook:

Those 49 Americans in Orlando are really dead.

That's not a scare.
That's a fact.

And no more Americans should die for your theories.

Robert Cook said...

"As a result of today's liberal squeamishness, we now have 49 civilian casualties anyway: Americans in Orlando."

How is this latest in an ongoing series of mass murders by disturbed individuals a result of "liberal squeamishness" about killing civilians. ("They're wimps, I tellz ya!")

sinz52 said...

Robert Cook: "why haven't they reacted as such to any of the many (and proliferating) violent eruptions by such cranks over the past two or more decades? "


Hey, YOU guys on the left created the problem (and other problems too) when you successfully deinstitutionalized the mentally ill and the insane.

It used to be a lot easier to institutionalize someone who was crazy. Thanks to agitation from left-wing civil-liberties advocates, we now have loons running around everywhere. True, they're supposed to be on meds. But you can't be sure that a loon on his own behavior will take those meds. Many don't. And any mental-health professional will tell you that those meds require constant monitoring, switching meds, adjusting doses, etc., which can't happen once you lose track of the patient.

That's how we ended up with so many bums (NOT "homeless," that politically correct cover word) infesting our streets. Time was when the cops would raid them and get them institutionalized.

Pookie Number 2 said...

Pookie Number 2: If the grotesque murderous acts of unbalanced loner malcontents with legally obtained automatic weapons were seen by Washington as an existential threat, why haven't they reacted as such to any of the many (and proliferating) violent eruptions by such cranks over the past two or more decades? Americans kill more Americans than ISIL terrorists ever will.

Two reasons come to mind. First, they have to contend with dishonest people like you who are happy to have people die rather than transgress the bounds of political correctness by, for example, acknowledging the religious motivations of 'unbalanced loner malcontents'.

Second, even for the people that analyze matters in good faith, there are legitimate challenges in balancing security and liberty.

sinz52 said...

Robert Cook:

Matteen wasn't a "disturbed individual."

He was a Muslim who pledged allegiance to ISIL and acted on their behalf. That was a political act, not a random freak-out.

If there were no ISIL, he would have no one on whose behalf to act.

Robert Cook said...

"Those 49 Americans in Orlando are really dead.

"That's not a scare.
"That's a fact.

"And no more Americans should die for your theories."


Yes, they are, and that's a terrible thing. What does this have to do with my "theories," (whatever you think those may be)? Americans killing Americans in such mass murders is a chronic national problem.

Scott M said...

legally obtained automatic weapons

You cannot legally obtain automatic weapons without a class three dealers license which is difficult both to get and maintain. The shooter in Orlando 1) did not have a class three dealers license and 2) did not have automatic weapons.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your worldview.

Robert Cook said...

"Matteen wasn't a 'disturbed individual.'

"He was a Muslim who pledged allegiance to ISIL and acted on their behalf. That was a political act, not a random freak-out.

"If there were no ISIL, he would have no one on whose behalf to act."


Yes, he was a disturbed individual. He was an angry man whose first wife fled their marriage after three months, and who was, by all signs, a closeted, conflicted gay man who acted out of that anger and psychological conflict. His "pledging allegiance to ISIL" was simply the self-aggrandizement of an angry loser who sought to valorize his own cowardly behavior, hiding (from himself and the world) his actual motivation. Without ISIL's existence, he would likely still have acted, but would have found another excuse to justify himself.

Rick said...

Robert Cook said...
Americans kill more Americans than ISIL terrorists ever will.


Black Americans kill more Black Americans than cops ever will, therefore all complaints about cop behavior are scare tactics and should be derided.

Pookie Number 2 said...

What does this have to do with my "theories," (whatever you think those may be)? Americans killing Americans in such mass murders is a chronic national problem.

If (heaven forfend) anyone serious were to pay attention to your delusions about 'enriching the weapons and intelligence-systems providers at our expense', then they'd be ignoring the actual issues stemming from mental illness and religiously-inspired violence.

To whatever extent security officials focus on your ego-focused, intentionally misleading distractions - rather than real problems - they endanger the innocent people they're supposed to protect.

Robert Cook said...

"Hey, YOU guys on the left created the problem (and other problems too) when you successfully deinstitutionalized the mentally ill and the insane."

That wasn't the act of "guys on the left," but of budget-cutting government policy-makers. Why spend public dollars on providing appropriate institutionalization and mental health resources for mentally ill people when those dollars can be better spent on building huge sports stadiums that will be profit private franchise-owners, (among many other things those dollars are being spent on instead of appropriate mental health resources)?

Pookie Number 2 said...

His "pledging allegiance to ISIL" was simply the self-aggrandizement of an angry loser who sought to valorize his own cowardly behavior, hiding (from himself and the world) his actual motivation. Without ISIL's existence, he would likely still have acted, but would have found another excuse to justify himself.

No-one doubts your deep first-hand familiarity with how 'an angry loser' thinks, but your certainty about the shooter's motivations here, and your intentional disregard of religiously-inspired violence are particularly amusing.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

and who was, by all signs, a closeted, conflicted gay man who acted out of that anger and psychological conflict

Even if true, don't you believe his religious beliefs may have played a role in this "psychological conflict"? You're clearly trying too hard to avoid the obvious.

J. Farmer said...

This goes back to the very reasons why Afghanistan and Iraq were such terrible cases of do somethingism ("don't just stand there, do something!") 9/11 was carried out by primarily Saudi nationalities arriving in the country by commercial aircraft carrying legal visas with them. How does bombing Aleppo or Ramadi prevent this problem? This is not a problem you can bomb your way out of. Our incessant interventionism in the middle east since the autumn of 2001 has been a counterproductive failure.

Robert Cook said...

"...don't you believe his religious beliefs may have played a role in this 'psychological conflict'?"

Well, of course they did. This does not mean his act was "Islamic terrorism." It means his religious beliefs added to his internal conflicts about his sexual desires. His act was an expression of his own personal inner turmoil. I think an impetus of at least equal possible significance was his apparent failure to make any connections with other gay men. Look at Elliot Rodger from a couple of years ago.

Robert Cook said...

"This is not a problem you can bomb your way out of. Our incessant interventionism in the middle east since the autumn of 2001 has been a counterproductive failure."

Word!

Robert Cook said...

Sorry, bad link to "Elliot Rodger" above.

Here.

Jason said...

That totally explains why he was casing Disney.

Jesus, Cookie, that's some next-level stupid.

JPS said...

Robert Cook, 9:31:

"His 'pledging allegiance to ISIL' was simply the self-aggrandizement of an angry loser who sought to valorize his own cowardly behavior, hiding (from himself and the world) his actual motivation."

You have a point, but it is amazing how effectively Islamic fanaticism gives alienated losers a purpose, and how it teaches them that the slaughter of innocents will turn them into winners.

"Without ISIL's existence, he would likely still have acted, but would have found another excuse to justify himself."

And without our interventions that you deplore, Islamic fanatics would find other reasons to want us dead, and try to make it happen. Does "the tragedy of Andalusia" ring a bell?

Pookie Number 2 said...

How does bombing Aleppo or Ramadi prevent this problem?

As I understand it, the goal was to provide an opportunity for Islam to mature into something more benign. That project would necessarily take decades, and is easily derailed by politicians looking for short-term gain, of course.

mockturtle said...

This morning Robert Spencer reported that an undocumented Muslim 'migrant' was arrested in New Mexico with gas pipeline plans in her possession.

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2016/06/new-mexico-muslim-refugee-with-gas-pipeline-plans-arrested-in-border-county

AJ Lynch said...

Brennan is covering his ass so when the next big massacre happens he can say "it's not my fault- I told Obama about this yet Obama / Jeh Johnson still refused to secure the border and clamp down on visa overstays etc."

And what Curious George said in the first comment at 8:40AM.

exhelodrvr1 said...

Robert Cook,
How many US mass murders where the killers used automatic weapons have their been? (Other than Waco, I mean.)

coupe said...

After the briefing, Obama said we need to bring in 10,000 of those poor people...

AJ Lynch said...

If ISIS did not exist but gun access did, would Omar have still killed those 49 people? I think not.


If ISIS existed but gun access did not exist, would Omar have still attempted a mass killing? I think so.

Michael K said...

"any of the many (and proliferating) violent eruptions by such cranks over the past two or more decades? "

Cookie is going to give us a list, excluding inner city blacks, of course.

Fernandinande said...

Robert Cook said...
Americans kill more Americans than ISIL terrorists ever will.


Until they set of a dirty nuke in downtown New York or LA.

"There were 55% more casualties per capita from mass public shootings in EU than US from 2009-15"

The Drill SGT said...

by my count, there were 13 deaths from Muslim extremists, post-9-11, in the US under GWB. In the same period under BHO, there have been about 90, including 3 that each by themselves met or exceed the GWB total. Ft Hood, San Bernadino, Orlando. Maybe the strategy isn't working?

Rusty said...

Why Al. That's just crazy talk.

Jeff Teal said...

And Brennan is the bright guy who stopped LEO training on the religion of peace from the grave.How much CYA do Dhimmicrats do now?

Bob Loblaw said...

If ISIS existed but gun access did not exist, would Omar have still attempted a mass killing? I think so.

Yep. He would have used a bomb. The problem here isn't means, it's motivation.

Curious George said...

Cookie's psycho babble reminds me on the contortions the left made to explain Nidal Hasan going Allahu Akbar at Fort Hood. First, it was he had PTSD. Then it was made known that he was never in combat and they changed it PTSD through association...like you know, it's contagious. Then when it was discovered that he had ties to Al Queda, and planned the murders, it was OBama saving the day with the old "We maynever know the reason..."

He's a fucking Muzzie terrorist.

mockturtle said...

Dhimmicrats

Good! Very good!

Paul said...

Funny thing is I bet where ever Obama goes to live after he leaves office THERE WILL BE A WALL AROUND HIS HOUSE. And his SS guards will have guns.

Kind of ironic, right.

mockturtle said...

Apparently, he's going to live in Hawaii. We should sever Hawaii's statehood and add Mexico, instead.

Drago said...

Curious George: "Cookie's psycho babble reminds me on the contortions the left made to explain Nidal Hasan going Allahu Akbar at Fort Hood."

And before that the left spent 70 years explaining away communist mass murder, and they still do.

The left will always reflexively defend murderous enemies of western thought and civilization.

Robert Cook said...

"Cookie's psycho babble reminds me on the contortions the left made to explain Nidal Hasan going Allahu Akbar at Fort Hood."

Nidal Hasan was another emotionally unbalanced loner with poor social relationships who acted on his own and as a result of inner emotional turmoil. His act was another act of pscyhological distress and not a political act.

Nichevo said...

Robert Cook was another emotionally unbalanced loner with poor social relationships who acted on his own and as a result of inner emotional turmoil.

FIFY