Category: international tensions

What will it take to stop the PC insanity that shields the truth regarding the Jihad against the West! These are not just attacks by lone wolves, disgruntled Muslims, or insane people. While such may engage in acts of violence, the underlying driver is JIHAD, coordinated and implemented by those who seek a Caliphate and the death of all non-believers. They must be rooted out and given no quarter in the legal system. They are murderers and must be dealt with as such.
Murder is murder no matter what the motivation. Will day care centers, pre-schools, or public schools be next?
Face the facts or die!
The post below addresses Manchester in detail:

Manchester: This Time They Came for Our Children
By Roger L Simon May 22, 2017

It’s not just “Manchester England, England.” If you think what happened in Blighty can’t happen here — 19 killed, 59 injured — you’ll have to excuse me if I say “You’re out of your bloomin’ mind.” Did you already forget 9/11/2001? Or the Boston Marathon? Or San Bernardino? Or the Orlando gay bar attack less than a year ago that killed 49?

Oh, yeah. Seems so long ago, doesn’t it, even that last one? The “new normal.” We put these things out of our minds the week after to deal with the next trivial Washington scandal or go about our petty lives. Our culture lives in a self-destructive willful blindness, refusing to see the obvious even though it happens again and again across the globe. Radical Islam, Islamism, or whatever you want to call it has been at war with us since the Twin Towers came down and even well before. And they have no intention whatsoever of stopping.

Nevertheless we respond in the most perfunctory manner, nattering on about how Islam is a”religion of peace,” criticizing ourselves and others for “Islamophbia,” or dismissing it all as a police matter.

But this time it was teenage girls — our children — (emphasis mine) in that Manchester audience, murdered by a suicide bomber. If he had been more successful gaining entry, he might have killed several hundreds of them instead of, at this writing, only 19.

Have we learned anything? Is this finally going to be enough? Will we at last wake up? You tell me that the next time you drop your young daughter off at a rock concert you’re going to feel comfortable. Democrat, Republican, liberal, conservative, libertarian, or ladeedah, you’re going to have heart palpitations, I promise you.

Politicians blather on about how these terrorists are “cowards.” No, they’re not. Nothing cowardly about killing yourself for your vision of god, insane as it might be. What they are is maniacally evil, the same kind of evil that marched innocents into gas chambers in the 1940s. If you don’t confront it, it goes on and on, just as happened then. (emphasis mine)

Horrifying Video from Ariana Grande Concert During Terror Attack

So what do we do about it?

Begin with this:

Ban the word “Islamophobia” from the English language. It’s the biggest lie of our time, invented to distract from the obvious truth: Islam has a monumental problem with the modern world that affects all of us. Egypt’s al-Sisi knows it. Saudi King Salman seems now to know it. Only the “useful idiots” in the Western left deny this blatant reality. ISIS, al-Qaeda, and their ilk are the clear perpetrators, but the so-called liberals and progressives — in their endless morally narcissistic virtue signaling — are their enablers, actually their unindicted co-conspirators. It’s time we should indict them.

They keep repeating we shouldn’t tar all Muslims with this unconscionable murderous violence. Well, we shouldn’t. But if even ten percent of Muslims are accepting of violent jihadism, that’s ten percent of a billion and a half people, roughly four times the population of California and twice as big as all of France. Want to dismiss that as mere Islamophobia? You’re only contributing to its growth. And to the deaths of your children. (emphasis mine) Time to end this PC masquerade, which is a license to kill in disguise. Not all religions are the same, at least in their present forms. Buddhists aren’t blowing up teenagers in Manchester.

Also, time to get behind President Trump’s new initiative to enlist the Islamic world in their own reform. It’s high time an American president did that. Bush didn’t have the courage and Obama refused to believe there was a problem. He thought we were the problem — incredible, actually delusional, as that is in retrospect.(emphasis mine)

Politicians and the media particularly must face reality. We may not like it but we are at war. You should behave accordingly. This is Topic A — and there is no Topic B until further notice… that is unless you want Manchester actually to be the “new normal.” It pretty much is already. How horrible is that for all of us, how horrible for our children. Why don’t we all get together and put an end to it? It’s even more important than impeaching Trump. 

Related-pathetic:  The Morning Briefing: What Terror Attack?

Source: P J Media

Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

Warfare has entered a new era for which America is ill prepared and poorly armed. The U.S. has never been very good at winning the war of words, and in this new cyber age, that weakness is deadly.
Our military supersedes all others, but new and insidious fronts have opened in this information age and words have become lethal weapons..
Additionally, all of our public services are computer driven. Our lack of defense on this front is frightening. Either Congress gets its act together and unites on strengthening this front, or the nation will remain vulnerable to a disaster that can lead to catastrophic upheaval by the a populace struggling to survive.
Does that sound over the top? Does anyone really want to test that concept. Only the enemy within will benefit.

Excerpt:“We are hamstrung by a myriad of reasons, to include lack of accountability and oversight, bureaucracy, resulting in insufficient levels of resourcing and an inability to absorb cutting-edge information and analytic tools, and access to highly skilled personnel,” Lumpkin said.
At the same time, Lumpkin said America’s enemies are increasing their capabilities and investment.”

New strategies, tactics needed to fight influence, propaganda warfare threats, Senate told
BY: Bill Gertz
April 28, 2017 5:23 pm
The United States faces a growing threat of information warfare attacks and needs new strategies and organizations to counter it, national security experts told Congress this week.
John C. Inglis, former deputy director of the National Security Agency, said cyber attacks are only one form of influence, propaganda, and disinformation attacks being waged in the cyber war of ideas.
“Cyber warfare, in my view, is not a standalone entity,” Inglis told a Senate subcommittee hearing Thursday. “When you’re talking about information warfare, it’s at that top-most stack, and it does not necessarily comprise of an exchange of tools or an exchange of literal warfare. It is, in fact, a conflict of ideas.”
Inglis called for a new approach to information threats.
“We need to stop reacting well and thinking that we’ve therefore done good and start to drive and perhaps lead in this space and at least anticipate well or track well,” he said during a hearing of the Senate Armed Services subcommittee on cyber security.
The United States must aggressively tackle the problem, Inglis said.
“We can use the techniques that have been used against us, but we should never compromise our values, and there’s a distinct difference between those two,” he said.
Rand Waltzman, a specialist on information warfare with the RAND Corp., told the subcommittee the U.S. government needs to review and revamp laws and polices in the information warfare realm in order to better fight influence warfare. (emphasis mine)

“Operations in the information environment are starting to play a dominant role in everything from politics to terrorism to geopolitical warfare and even business, all things that are becoming increasingly dependent on the use of techniques of mass manipulation,” Waltzman said, adding that information warfare operations “occur at a speed and at an extent previously unimaginable.”
Technical cyber security means, the focus of U.S. government and private sector efforts, are ill-equipped to handle influence warfare. Waltzman called for new capabilities called cognitive security.

(emphasis mine)
An example was the domestic information attack launched by the Russian government in 2011 prior to the country’s legislative elections. Anti-government dissidents had organized a demonstration using a Twitter hashtag. When the Russian government found out, it flooded Twitter with gibberish tweets using the hashtag at a rate of 10 tweets per second, effectively preventing the demonstrators from using the social media platform to issue instructions.
Twitter did not stop the onslaught because it did not violate the platform’s terms of service.
Michael D. Lumpkin, a former State Department strategic messaging official, criticized the U.S. government’s capability to counter disinformation and promote its messages as outdated and stifled.
“We are hamstrung by a myriad of reasons, to include lack of accountability and oversight, bureaucracy, resulting in insufficient levels of resourcing and an inability to absorb cutting-edge information and analytic tools, and access to highly skilled personnel,” Lumpkin said.
At the same time, Lumpkin said America’s enemies are increasing their capabilities and investment.
“This, while our adversaries are increasing their investment in the information environment, will not be constrained by ethics, the law, or even the truth,” he said.
Clint Watts, a former FBI agent and specialist on information operations, said Russia is the leading power in the use of information operation.
“Russia does five things that sets it apart from others in terms of influence,” Watts said. “One, they create content across deliberate themes, political, social, and financial messages, but they hyper-empower those with hacked materials that act as nuclear fuel for information atomic bombs.”
These information bombs power political groups and other profiteers in the social media space, further amplifying their messages.
Moscow also pushes its disinformation and propaganda in unitary campaigns that appear to come from different locations at the same time, through the use of covert and overt accounts as well as social media platforms.
Russia shares content through semi-linked and covert online personas in order to create a public impression that its propaganda is more established than it is, while pushing themes over long periods of time.
The result is that Russian information warfare messages are pressed “deep into the target audience,” Watts said.
Russian trolls and others engaged in information operations target political opponents, whether politicians, media personalities, or “just people that don’t like Russian positions,” for long periods, he said.
Watts said countering cyber influence threats is a human, not a technical, challenge.
“American obsession with social media has overlooked several types of real-world actors that help enable their operations online,” he said.
They include pro-Russian “useful idiots,” including unwitting Americans who don’t know they are using Russian information for political gain. Others are “fellow travelers” who back Russia and provocateurs who create incidents in a bid to drive Internet traffic.
Both the Islamic State’s social media campaigns and Russia’s influence operations need to be countered, in addition to the use of cyber means.
“When it comes to Americans countering cyber influence operations, when all is said and done, far more is said than done,” Watts said. “We talk about it a lot, but we do fewer iterations than our Russian adversaries.”
Watts said that when the United States has acted in the information operations space, “it hasn’t been effective, and at worse it’s been counterproductive,”
“Despite spending hundreds of millions of dollars since 9/11 on U.S. influence and information operations, we’ve seen the expansion of al Qaeda and the Islamic State,” Watts said. “We’ve excessively focused on bureaucracy and digital tech tools, but at the same time these social media monitoring tools have failed to counter al Qaeda. They did not detect the rise of ISIS, nor did they detect the interference of Russia in our election last year.”
Better knowledge of Russian information warfare and influence operations is needed. The American government also needs better and more accurate communications.
Watts called for jettisoning the so-called whole-of-government approach to the problem and instead creating a task force to address cyber influence threats.
Current government efforts focus too much on purchasing technical tools to analyze social media, he said.
The private sector also need to restore the integrity of information on social media sites, Watts said. He noted progress by Facebook, Google, and Wikipedia, which recently launched efforts to block foreign information operations.
Facebook on Thursday published a report on information operations that called for countering influence campaigns by governments and non-state actors to distort political sentiment, “most frequently to achieve a strategic and/or geopolitical outcome.”
The social media giant said Russian influence operators used Facebook pages and false personas to spread stolen emails and documents during the 2016 election.
Watts said Twitter remains a holdout in efforts to limit foreign information operations.
“Twitter’s actions, if they take them on parallel with Facebook and Google and the others, can help shape the Russian influence of the French and German elections going into summer,” he said.
Waltzman, the RAND Corp. analyst, called for a new strategy to “make cognitive security a reality and counter this growing threat in the information environment.”
A private research center outside government should be created that is devoted to research and development of policies, technologies, and techniques for information operations.
“The center would not be operational, but rather set research and development agendas and provide education and distribution of technologies and service to any of the communities that it would serve,” he said.
Second, a government office, like the Pentagon’s Office of Net Assessment, should conduct a study of current laws and policies that “currently make operations in the information environment difficult to impossible” and how they can be updated to reflect the current information environment. The study also should outline a new organizational structure for information operations.
Subcommittee chairman Sen. Mike Rounds (R., S.D.) said the panel has held two classified briefings on cyber threats and efforts to counter them.
Thursday’s hearing focused largely on the Russian influence operation during the 2016 election, which was part of a program that dates back to the Soviet period.
Rounds said current cyber- and disinformation-related tools “have enabled Russia to achieve operational capabilities unimaginable to its Soviet forebear.”
“Ultimately, we will continue to struggle with cyber-enhanced information operation campaigns until we address the policy and strategy deficiencies that undermine our overall cyber posture,” he added.
“Our adversaries aim to leverage our distaste for censorship against us to delegitimize our democracy, influence our public discourse, and ultimately undermine our national security and confidence.”
Sen. Bill Nelson (D., Fla.) noted the problem is not new and that U.S. efforts to counter it are deficient.
“Our government and society remain ill-prepared to detect and counter these powerful new forms of information warfare, or to deter them through the threat of offensive versions of our own information operations,” he said.

Bill Gertz is the author of iWar: War and Peace in the Information Age that highlights information warfare threats. It is available at
The Washington Free Beacon

Knowledge Is Power: The Realistic Observer is a non-profit blog dedicated to bringing as much truth as possible to the readers.

Posted Tuesday, April 18th 2017 @ 2pm  by Staff
Air Force's Airmen Partake In Training Flights With The New F-35 At Hill Air Force Base
Two Russian bombers, each capable of delivering a nuclear payload, flew within 100 miles of the coast of Alaska on Monday night before being intercepted by US fighter jets, reports Fox News.

The Two Russian air force bombers, TU-95 “Bear” Planes, were approximately 280 miles from Elmendorf Air Base in the United States when the US scrambled a team of F-22 stealth jets and E-3 airborne surveillance planes to intercept the foreign aircraft.

The US and Russian jets flew side-by-side for an estimated 12 minutes before the “Bear” bombers turned around and headed back to Asia. This is the first provocation involving the Russian air force since Donald Trump was sworn in as the nation’s 45th president.

Tensions between Washington and Moscow are at an ‘all time low’ following recent events involving Syria and the alleged Russian hacking of the 2016 US election.

Last week, as Secretary of State Tillerson was in Moscow for his first official visit, three Russian bombers flew within miles of the east coast of Japan, prompting the Japanese Air Force to scramble 14 fighter jets.

The last time Russian bombers flew off the coast of the US was July 4, 2015; timed to coincide with Russian President Putin’s phone call to then-President Obama, wishing him a “Happy Independence Day.”

Source: Sean Hannity