Think gain my friend, if you thought '1984' was far out get a load of this.

Occasionally I will ride shotgun with my friend Ron while he makes his scheduled rounds at various industrial stops in the Florida panhandle and southern Georgia…it’s just one way we keep in touch since we left the radio station some years ago.  On one recent road trip Ron pointed to various surveillance cameras that were mounted on buildings, traffic lights, and telephone poles and described the forecasts pointed out in “1984”, a dystopian novel by George Orwell published in 1949.

Well Ron is not within earshot at the moment but if he were I would probably say, “Think gain my friend, if you thought '1984' was far out get a load of this.” ~ Norman Hooben

Driving surveillance: What does your car know about you? We hacked a Chevy to find out.
By Geoffrey A. Fowler / the Washington Post
Dec 17, 2019

Behind the wheel, it’s nothing but you, the open road — and your car quietly recording your every move.

On a recent drive, a 2017 Chevrolet collected my precise location. It stored my phone’s ID and the people I called. It judged my acceleration and braking style, beaming back reports to its maker General Motors over an always-on Internet connection.

Cars have become the most sophisticated computers many of us own, filled with hundreds of sensors. Even older models know an awful lot about you. Many copy over personal data as soon as you plug in a smartphone.

But for the thousands you spend to buy a car, the data it produces doesn’t belong to you. My Chevy’s dashboard didn’t say what the car was recording. It wasn’t in the owner’s manual. There was no way to download it.

To glimpse my car data, I had to hack my way in.

We’re at a turning point for driving surveillance: In the 2020 model year, most new cars sold in the United States will come with built-in Internet connections, including 100 percent of Fords, GMs and BMWs and all but one model Toyota and Volkswagen. (This independent cellular service is often included free, or sold as an add-on.) Cars are becoming smartphones on wheels, sending and receiving data from apps, insurance firms and pretty much wherever their makers want. Some brands even reserve the right to use the data to track you down if you don’t pay your bills.

When I buy a car, I assume the data I produce is owned by me — or at least is controlled by me. Many automakers do not. They act like how and where we drive, also known as telematics, isn’t personal information.

Cars now run on the new oil: your data. It is fundamental to a future of transportation where vehicles drive themselves and we hop into whatever one is going our way. Data isn’t the enemy. Connected cars already do good things like improve safety and send you service alerts that are much more helpful than a check-engine light in the dash.

But we’ve been down this fraught road before with smart speakers, smart TVs, smartphones and all the other smart things we now realize are playing fast and loose with our personal lives. Once information about our lives gets shared, sold or stolen, we lose control.

There are no federal laws regulating what carmakers can collect or do with our driving data. And carmakers lag in taking steps to protect us and draw lines in the sand. Most hide what they’re collecting and sharing behind privacy policies written in the kind of language only a lawyer’s mother could love.

Car data has a secret life. To find out what a car knows about me, I borrowed some techniques from crime scene investigators.

Jim Mason hacks into cars for a living, but usually just to better understand crashes and thefts. The Caltech-trained engineer works in Oakland, California, for a firm called ARCCA that helps reconstruct accidents. He agreed to help conduct a forensic analysis of my privacy.

I chose a Chevrolet as our test subject because its maker GM has had the longest of any automaker to figure out data transparency. It began connecting cars with its OnStar service in 1996, initially to summon emergency assistance. Today, GM has more than 11 million 4G LTE data-equipped vehicles on the road, including free basic service and extras you pay for. I found a volunteer, Doug, who let us peer inside his two-year-old Chevy Volt.

I met Mason at an empty warehouse, where he began by explaining one important bit of car anatomy. Modern vehicles don’t just have one computer. There are multiple, interconnected brains that can generate up to 25 gigabytes of data per hour from sensors all over the car. Even with Mason’s gear, we could only access some of these systems.

This kind of hacking isn’t a security risk for most of us — it requires hours of physical access to a vehicle. Mason brought a laptop, special software, a box of circuit boards and dozens of sockets and screwdrivers.

We focused on the computer with the most accessible data: the infotainment system. You might think of it as the car’s touch screen audio controls, yet many systems interact with it, from navigation to a synced-up smartphone. The only problem? This computer is buried beneath the dashboard.

After an hour of prying and unscrewing, our Chevy’s interior looked like it had been lobotomized. But Mason had extracted the infotainment computer, about the size of a small lunchbox. He clipped it into a circuit board, which fed into his laptop. The data didn’t copy over in our first few attempts. “There is a lot of trial and error,” said Mason.

(Don’t try this at home. Seriously — we had to take the car into a repair shop to get the infotainment computer reset.)

It was worth the trouble when Mason showed me my data. There on a map was the precise location where I’d driven to take apart the Chevy. There were my other destinations, such as the hardware store I’d stopped at to buy some tape.

Among the trove of data points were unique identifiers for my and Doug’s phones, and a detailed log of phone calls from the previous week. There was a long list of contacts, right down to people’s address, emails and even photos.

For a broader view, Mason also extracted the data from a Chevrolet infotainment computer that I bought used on eBay for $375. It contained enough data to reconstruct the Upstate New York travels and relationships of a total stranger. We know he or she frequently called someone listed as “Sweetie,” whose photo we also have. We could see the exact Gulf station where they bought gas, the restaurant where they ate (called Taste China) and the unique identifiers for their Samsung Galaxy Note phones.

Infotainment systems can collect even more. Mason has hacked into Fords that record locations once every few minutes, even when you don’t use the navigation system. He’s seen German cars with 300 gigabyte hard drives — five times as much as a basic iPhone 11. The Tesla Model 3 can collect video snippets from the car’s many cameras. Coming next: face data, used to personalize the vehicle and track driver attention.

In our Chevy, we likely glimpsed just a fraction of what GM knows. We didn’t see what was uploaded to GM’s computers, because we couldn’t access the live OnStar cellular connection. (Researchers have done those kinds of hacks before to prove connected vehicles can be remotely controlled.)

My volunteer car owner Doug asked GM to see the data it collected and shared. The automaker just pointed us to an obtuse privacy policy. Doug also (twice) sent GM a formal request under a 2003 California data law to ask who the company shared his information with. He got no reply.

GM spokesman David Caldwell declined to offer specifics on Doug’s Chevy, but said the data GM collects generally falls into three categories: vehicle location, vehicle performance and driver behavior. “Much of this data is highly technical, not linkable to individuals and doesn’t leave the vehicle itself,” he said.

The company, he said, collects real-time data to monitor vehicle performance to improve safety and to help design future products and services.

But there were clues to what more GM knows on its website and app. It offers a Smart Driver score — a measure of good driving — based on how hard you brake and turn, and how often you drive late at night. They’ll share that with insurance companies, if you want. With paid OnStar service, I could, on demand, locate the car’s exact location. It also offers in-vehicle WiFi and remote key access for Amazon package deliveries. An OnStar Marketplace connects the vehicle directly with third-party apps for Domino’s, IHOP, Shell and others.

The OnStar privacy policy, possibly only ever read by yours truly, grants the company rights to a broad set of personal and driving data without much detail on when and how often it might collect it. It says: “We may keep the information we collect for as long as necessary” to operate, conduct research or satisfy GM’s contractual obligations. Translation: pretty much forever.

It’s likely GM and other automakers only keep just a slice of the data cars generate. But think of that as a temporary phenomenon. Coming 5G cellular networks promise to link cars to the Internet with ultra-fast, ultra-high-capacity connections. As wireless connections get cheaper and data becomes more valuable, anything the car knows about you is fair game

GM’s view, echoed by many other automakers, is that we gave them permission for all of this. “Nothing happens without customer consent,” said GM’s Caldwell.

When my volunteer Doug bought his Chevy, he didn’t even realize OnStar basic service came standard. (I don’t blame him — who really knows what all they’re initialing on a car purchase contract?) There is no button or menu inside the Chevy to shut off OnStar or other data collection, though GM says it has added one to newer vehicles. Customers can press the console OnStar button and ask a representative to remotely disconnect.

What’s the worry? From conversations with industry insiders, I know many automakers haven’t totally figured out what to do with the growing amounts of driving data we generate. But that’s hardly stopping them from collecting it.

Five years ago, 20 automakers signed onto volunteer privacy standards, pledging to “provide customers with clear, meaningful information about the types of information collected and how it is used” as well as “ways for customers to manage their data.” But when I called eight of the largest automakers, not even one offered a dashboard for customers to look at, download and control their data.

Automakers haven’t had a data reckoning yet, but they’re due for one. GM ran an experiment in which it tracked the radio music tastes of 90,000 volunteer drivers to look for patterns with where they traveled. According to the Detroit Free Press, GM told marketers that the data might help them persuade a country music fan who normally stopped at Tim Horton’s to go to McDonald’s instead.

GM would not tell me exactly what data it collected for that program but said “personal information was not involved” because it was anonymized data. (Privacy advocates have warned that location data is personal because it can be re-identified with individuals because we follow such unique patterns.)

GM’s privacy policy, which the company says it will update before the end of 2019, says it may “use anonymized information or share it with third parties for any legitimate business purpose.” Such as whom? “The details of those third-party relationships are confidential,” said Caldwell.

There are more questions. GM’s privacy policy says it will comply with legal data demands. How often does it share our data with the government? GM doesn’t offer a transparency report like tech companies do.

Automakers say they put data security first. But I suspect they’re just not used to customers demanding transparency. They also probably want to have sole control over the data, given that the industry’s existential threats — self-driving and ride-hailing technologies — are built on it.

But not opening up brings problems, too. Automakers are battling with repair shops in Massachusetts about a proposal that would require car companies to grant owners — and mechanics — access to telematics data. The Auto Care Association says locking out independent shops could give consumers fewer choices, and make us end up paying more for service. The automakers say it’s a security and privacy risk.

In 2020, the California Consumer Privacy Act will require any company that collects personal data about the state’s residents to provide access to the data and give people the ability to opt out of its sharing. GM said it would comply with the law but didn’t say how.

Are any carmakers better? Among the privacy policies I read, Toyota’s stood out for drawing a few clear lines in the sand about data sharing. It says it won’t share “personal information” with data resellers, social networks or ad networks — but still carves out the right to share what it calls “vehicle data” with business partners.

Until automakers put even a fraction of the effort they put into TV commercials into giving us control over our data, I’d be wary about using in-vehicle apps or signing up for additional data services. At least smartphone apps like Google Maps let you turn off and delete location history.

And Mason’s hack brought home a scary reality: Simply plugging a smartphone into a car could put your data at risk. If you’re selling your car or returning a lease or rental take the time to delete the data saved on its infotainment system. An app called Privacy4Cars offers model-by-model directions. Mason gives out gifts of car-lighter USB plugs, which let you charge a phone without connecting it to the car computer. (You can buy inexpensive ones online.)

If you’re buying a new vehicle, tell the dealer you want to know about connected services — and how to turn them off. Few offer an Internet “kill switch,” but they may at least allow you turn off location tracking.

Or, for now at least, you can just buy an old car. Mason, for one, drives a conspicuously non-connected 1992 Toyota.

______

 

 Note from Norm: You can read the original article here where a video and other pictures can be viewed.

 

What Really Happened at NAS Pensacola (A Must Read For Every American)

What Really Happened at NAS Pensacola, and Why

 

OpEd: Naval Aviator reveals what really happened in Pensacola. A must read and share.
Posted by DML
If you share just one thing today on Facebook and social media, it should be the essay below written by a naval aviator. It is simply brilliant. Long, yes, but worth every word if you care about national security and clearing of the swamp. Do not fail your neighbor, share this now! — Dennis Michael Lynch

What Really Happened at NAS Pensacola, and Why
December 9, 2019 by David Blackmon

David Blackmon is a veteran with 20+ years of service, a Naval Aviator who flew combat missions in Iraq, and had 15+ years in counter-terrorism.  He also served as a flight instructor at NAS Pensacola.

I reported to Building 633 at Naval Air Station Pensacola in October of 2002. Checking in to flight school is a point in time for each future aviator that is never forgotten. Nobody becomes a Naval Aviator by accident.
Setting foot on the quarterdeck and dropping your orders to get stamped at Naval Aviation Schools Command is the culmination of years of applications, college, physical training, aptitude screenings, FBI background checks, and performance well above your peer group who had also been competing for the coveted “pilot spot”. If you get there via the Naval Academy, ROTC, or Officer Candidate School, when you get to Pensacola, you have “made it”, but you are also just starting.
Instructors and staff refer to the entirety of the training program as “The Pipeline”. The start of The Pipeline is the front desk at Building 633 in Pensacola. This is where the first reality check for future aviators sets in, as class and flights don’t start the next day. There are only a certain number of seats for each API (Aviation Preflight Indoctrination) class, and there is a waiting list. “A-Pool” is where you wait (a pool of people, not of water). Building 633 is where A-Pool is administered, and where the weekly Friday morning muster takes place, and where the next week’s “class up” list is announced. This is where the terrorist attack took place.

The Naval Aviation Training “Pipeline” at a glance:

A-Pool. Pensacola.
Aviation Preflight Indoctrination (API), 4 weeks of academic classes and water survival courses. Pensacola.

Primary Flight Training (150ish hours in a T-6 Texan): Pensacola or Corpus [Christi]

Advanced Flight Training (Jets, Props, and Helicopters) Wings are earned at completion of Advanced. Pensacola (Helicopters), Corpus (Props), Kingsville & Meridian (Jets)
Fleet Replacement Squadron: (Learning your fleet aircraft).  Navy, Marine, and Coast Guard aviators all go through the same training pipeline through Advanced.

It was just after 0700 last Friday when my phone starting ringing. A relative’s best friend called her in a panic because her husband wasn’t responding, and she wanted to know if I knew anything. Luckily, he is a doctor at the hospital at Corry Station, about 3 miles away and nowhere near the shooting and I was able to put them at ease for his safety.

I had a group chat with about 20 officers still in the area. Friends and co-workers were exchanging information, all of them aviators, many still on lock down. Some of them were directly in charge of the response and involved in the investigation. All of this is available now in open media, but this is what I know.

The Saudi terrorist checked in on Monday and seemed “normal”. He held the “dinner party” on Thursday night with more than 10 Royal Saudi Air Force Officers in attendance. At this party, they watched videos of mass shootings, mostly Islamic propaganda. The next morning, Friday, he systematically attacked building 633 while one of his fellow officers followed and filmed while several other Saudis waited and observed the attack from a car.

The attacker started at the Quarterdeck (front desk), and the 3 killed were on duty at the time. Ensign Watson was the duty officer, was shot 5 times and still managed to call first responders and evacuate the building and personally directed them to the location of the shooter prior to dying of his wounds. The other 2 killed were also in the immediate vicinity of the quarterdeck. Many of the wounded were as well, some being wounded as they tried to climb out of windows.
Per Navy policy, none had weapons to defend themselves with. The first responders that confronted the shooter were from the local sheriff’s department. Two were wounded in the gun battle, and the terrorist was killed. Three active duty Americans were dead, 8 more wounded, 2 deputies wounded. Many of the wounded were shot through the doors of classrooms on multiple floors of building 633. Most of the base remained on lockdown well into the afternoon as the base was systematically searched for the missing Saudi terrorist officers. By day’s end, 6 additional Saudi Arabian officers were in FBI custody, and several were at large in the community and a man-hunt is still underway.

So, over a 5 day span, the terrorist checked in, acquired a handgun with 4 extended magazines and ammunition, posted a manifesto online condemning the US as a “nation of evil” along Islamist and anti-Semitic lines, planned and executed his attack with at least 3 accomplices. At least 10 Saudi Military Officers knew of the plan, and either participated or did nothing to stop it. Each one of these individuals had passed the screening process to come train in the United States. That brief recount of the chain of events begs a series of questions, some of which are easier to answer than others.

Here are some of the most obvious questions, and my best effort to answer them…

Was this terrorism?  Absolutely!

Much has been made of the lack of a formal declaration by the Military or other Federal Authority, but I understand the delay. Not only is a long term alliance involved (more on that later), but there are several members of the Royal Saudi delegation still at large within the United States. If you declare all of them terrorists, it makes the possibility of an orderly surrender virtually zero. On the off chance that these guys were at Waffle House at the time of the attack and are freaked out and hiding, it’s appropriate to not label them terrorists, yet.  Congressman Gaetz has appropriately called this terrorism and called for a review of entire program.
Why are we training Saudis in Pensacola?
While the brightest light is on the Saudis in the program, we train aviators from multiple nations in Pensacola. Germany, Sweden, and Singapore also have a large volume of students train in Pensacola. The obvious comparison to this incident is to the fact that the majority of the 9-11 highjackers were trained in Florida. It is an important distinction to note that all of those individuals were civilians and had no interaction with any military training program.It is equally important to note that 10+ members of the Royal Saudi Air Force knew of a planned mass murder of American military, and either participated in it or agreed in principal to allow it to happen.
Saudi Arabia is currently our strongest ally in the Middle East. We base troops there, we stage equipment there, and we get our fuel for operations from there. If we are going to be involved in the Middle East, we need an ally like Saudi Arabia.

We were also allies with Iran, until the Islamic Revolution there resulted in the famous hostage situation. Then we were allies with Iraq, until Saddam fired on the USS Stark (killing 37 sailors) and subsequently invaded Kuwait. So now we are allied with Saudi Arabia, for now.

What is it like training an international student?
Each nation is different, and it was interesting to see some stereotypes play out and interact with different cultures. The Swedish and Norwegians were your typical Vikings. The Germans were often humorless, focused, and smart. The Singaporeans were incredibly disciplined, and this group of students policed itself in an impressive manner. Any Sing who did poorly on a flight or test would have other students ensure they did well the next time around. I’d gladly fight alongside any of these guys any day of the week.  I stay in touch with several of my students as their careers advance.

The Saudi students have an entirely different reputation and structure to their training. While all of the other nations employ a form of meritocracy to be in the flight program, the Saudi students are typically the child of a Saudi sheik, politician, or member of a rich/important Saudi family. They all drive luxury vehicles, and flaunt their wealth to the other students and instructors. It isn’t unusual to see a Saudi student wearing designer shoes that cost thousands of dollars in their uniforms instead of their issued shoes or boots.

The Saudis do not stand any of the squadron watches (Like assistant OOD, where the flight schedule is executed), while other nations participate fully in squadron functions. The Saudis also have a cadre of senior officers in Pensacola, ostensibly to monitor and aid the progress of the students. They employ a number of former/retired (US) Navy pilots to serve as tutors to the Saudis, and also to provide instruction on how to properly interact with their US instructors and inside of American society. The retired officers also act as a liaison to the American command structure.
Our instructors are told that we can only instruct the Saudis in flying. Issues regarding discipline, respect, or military bearing, etc., all have to be referred to the liaisons. Those issues are rampant among the Saudi contingent, and are well known among the chain of command. While there are certainly some Saudi students who have been respectful and disciplined the norm is an aloof, arrogant child who seeming feels superior to his instructor.

American and non-Saudi international students are expected to show up to the pre-flight briefs ready to explain all of the concepts required in the flight to the instructor (proof they study and paid attention in class).  Saudi students often come to briefs unprepared to meet that standard, and expect the material to be presented to them anew. The norm for the Saudis is to pass the student regardless of performance, unless they are simply a danger to themselves, then they get referred back through the liaisons.

We are paid to move them through the pipeline and deliver them having completed the syllabus. We can’t make them study. One friend had a Saudi student refuse to recover an aircraft from a spin, and simply threw up his hands and stated “If Allah wills it, it will recover.” This was during out-of-control flight, with the aircraft falling several thousand feet per minute. The instructor took controls, recovered from the spin, and returned base. That student eventually graduated.
I have had conversations over the last 3 days with at least a dozen current or former Navy flight instructors. Unanimously, the sentiment is that Saudis should be expelled from training in our program. Not only is there legitimate concern for personal safety and national security, there is a general feeling that they won’t be able to put their feeling aside and provide proper training.
Why did the Sheriff Department have to stop the shooting and not active duty watch-standers or military police?  In short, because the Sailors at NAS Pensacola were failed by their leadership.  After the Naval Reserve Center in Chattanooga was attacked by a Muslim terrorist, then Candidate Trump was critical of the policy of military members being disarmed while on duty. The only reason that the Chattanooga body count wasn’t higher was because the Navy Commanding Officer (an aviator) had disregarded policy and had his personal handgun with him in his office and he confronted the attacker and returned fire. He would later say that he disregarded policy because the safety of his command was his ultimate responsibility. He defended his command that day, and saved lives.

The next ideation of the NDAA (National Defense Authorization Act) included provisions to allow commanders the discretion to allow CHL holders to bring their personal weapons onto base to defend themselves in similar instances. Tragically, no US commander has had the guts to implement the allowances granted by law.

We didn’t learn our lessons with the Fort Hood shooting, The Navy Yard Shooting, and the Chattanooga shooting, so now we have this. Will we finally recognize the threat and allow those who have sworn to defend the constitution of the United States the ability to defend themselves while at work on US soil?  I doubt it.  Sadly, I think it will take an action similar to what President Trump took with Chief Gallagher to make stubborn and stupid Navy leadership do what is the obvious and correct course of action.
Should we have seen this coming?
Absolutely. When I told my father (a retired Naval Aviator) that a foreign student was responsible, he responded, “I’ll bet it was a Saudi.” A brother is a veteran Naval Flight Officer who trained in Pensacola. His response, “It’s probably a Saudi.” My neighbor from Pensacola who now flies for an airline “Mother F***, you know it was a Saudi!”
For some reason, there is a political push to excuse these attacks as one-off, or that the perpetrator was “radical”. The news is already saying “There is no direct link to a terrorist organization.”…as if ISIS gives out membership IDs and T-Shirts. The Politically Correct folks tell us to not judge an entire religion or culture by the actions of a single individual.
The Factually Correct among us looks at this chain of events and sees no coincidences. The fact that such a large portion of the Saudi contingent knew of the impending attack and chose to participate and none chose to stop it show the truth that many have long known but few in leadership will acknowledge. The actions taken by this Royal Saudi Officer were not at all “extremist views”.  His views and actions were well in line with the mainstream Saudi Officer in the unit.
Defenders of Islam will say that it is a “Religion of Peace” and only “extremists” join the terror groups. With sad irony, many critics of Islamic terrorism have observed the rise of ISIS with their pool of men and resources flowing largely from Sunni Saudi Arabia have said that it’s the extremist Muslim who is actually fighting, but the peaceful Muslim is the majority….they just write the checks. The example in Pensacola shows us that it’s the minority extremist shooting his classmates; it’s the peaceful Muslim standing alongside filming.
Students of history will know that these terror attacks are neither random nor motivated by “extreme” thinking. It is an American tendency to think that history started in 1776, or maybe 1492 at the earliest. Our schools teach world history and battles that took place in Europe as being between empires like the “Romans” and “Ottomans”.
They leave the parts out where it was the HOLY Roman Empire that defeated the ISLAMIC Caliphate in Vienna, September 11th 1683. This military defeat and its date are etched into the cultural identity of every Muslim just like the Alamo and San Jacinto are taught to kids in Texas. The only difference is that Texas school children don’t have a religious document telling them that the conquest continues and it is their life-long Jihad to install Islam as the law of the entire world.
The events in Pensacola last Friday are minuscule in the scope of world history. It is, however, a perfect illustration of the war of cultures (and yes, religions) that we currently find ourselves as participants in. While the Politically Correct in Washington will likely downplay the details and work to wipe the event from the headlines to preserve an alliance, the Factually Correct among us are still walking the streets with Saudi terrorists at large.
Those in our military will follow the orders they gave their oaths to follow, though we strongly disagree with them. We will likely continue to risk our lives and work to train people that hate us, and would kill us if given the opportunity. The King of Saudi Arabia can say that the actions don’t reflect those in his Kingdom. The facts make him a liar.
Where do we go from here?
1. Immediately allow all Commissioned Officers and senior NCOs (E-7+) who are qualified (military or CHL) to carry a military equivalent or issued weapon while on duty.
2. All Saudi personnel in the US should be restricted to base, and have their quarters searched for weapons. If they had no knowledge, they should be expelled. If they did have knowledge or participated, they should be executed.
3. Suspend training Saudi personnel indefinitely. Only resume the program when the FBI can conduct background checks for each student and officer. Once screened and admitted, Saudi students should be restricted to base and not allowed into the community.
4. Evaluate the “alliance” between the US and Saudi Arabia beyond the fact that they are a client nation buying billions of dollars in weapons and training. Is our strategic relationship with the Saudi government worth the cost inflicted on us by a Saudi population which clearly hates us and continues to do us harm. Do the officers that we train for combat ever actually participate in conflict in a meaningful way that support US interests or relieve demand on US forces? If not, disband the program forever.
5. Be better students of history. Value reality above wishful thinking. Judge cultures and religions by what they do, rather than what they want you to think. Take political blinders off and build and execute policy based on reality rather than wishful thinking.

That is all.  ~ David Blackmon

_____________________________________

 

After thought: It is highly suggested that all Americans view the video posted here.

Posted by Norman E. Hooben

One more thing... If you think for a minute that Islam is the religion of peace, consider the following: 

Islam’s view of Western ideology, “It is written in the Koran, that all Nations who should not have acknowledged their authority are sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon whoever they could find and to make Slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.” ~ Tripoli’s ambassador to London in March 1785 

 

















In April 2013, President Obama authorized the C.I.A. to begin a program to arm the rebels at a base in Jordan, and more recently the administration decided to expand the training mission with a larger parallel Pentagon program in Saudi Arabia to train “vetted” rebels to battle fighters of the Islamic State, with the aim of training approximately 5,000 rebel troops per year.  ~ New York Times Oct. 14, 2014