Homeland Security, evidently more concerned about an “equivalency” diversion over “right wing extremists,” has a handle on things.

The FBI and Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson are “downplaying” the likelihood that the Somalia-based Islamist terror group al-Shabaab has a plan in place to carry out its threat to attack U.S. malls, CNN reported Saturday. If true, that has special relevance for the Mall of America in Bloomington, Minn., one of the sites mentioned by the group as a potential target where they would be able to carry out an attack similar to an assault on a mall in Kenya, in which 60 people were killed.
If Somalian al-Shabaab operatives allowed into this country pose such a small threat that Americans can safely disarm in areas they target, why is the FBI making such a big deal over them?
FBI

Johnson’s advice, that “public vigilance, public awareness and public caution in situations like this is particularly important” is true enough, but what’s lacking from that counsel is public preparedness to do anything about it if an attack happens, in spite of reassurances and promises of “enhanced security.” That’s because … well … let Mall of America speak for itself.

“At Mall of America, safety is a top priority,” it advises visitors on a Guests & Security page. “Guns are banned on these premises.” And just to make sure everyone knows about the policy, prominent signs are posted at the mall citing Minnesota law, so that all inclined to obey such restrictions know security is acting serious about trying to enforce management fantasy.

It’s a curious position for the mall to take, seeing how its owner, the Triple Five Group, is in turn owned by the Ghermizian family, Jewish-Iranian immigrants to Canada. One would think they would know better than most the depth of hatred and violence that demonic enemies of civilization are capable of, particularly a family that personally can recall a time when ethnic and cultural tolerance in Iran allowed people of all religions to coexist – as do I. It’s also curious that fortunate Americans would value consumerism over unalienable rights secured with blood, powder and steel, submitting to foreigners who forbid the exercise of their right to keep and bear arms — instead of refusing to surrender on that point and just shopping someplace they’re respected.

Continue reading →