60 Minutes ran a feature Sunday night about the FBI curious role in the May 2015 Garland jihad attack at a free speech event co-organized by Pamela Geller and me. It was, predictably enough, viciously biased, sloppy, and incomplete, but it was nonetheless illuminating in raising a hard and unanswerable question: did the FBI want Pamela Geller and me dead?…
60 Minutes also gave a nod to Sharia blasphemy laws by describing the contest as “provocative.” It was an art exhibit, featuring historical and modern images of Muhammad, some created by Muslims. It was only provocative to Muslims who believe in Islam’s death penalty for blasphemy (and brainwashed dhimmis). Was 60 Minutes implying endorsement of that death penalty? Why, yes. If our event was provocative, the shooters were justifiably provoked…
Despite all the predictable politically correct whitewashing and appeasement, CBS did a good job of highlighting a curious and still unexplained aspect of the attack: the FBI clearly knew the attack was coming (although it didn’t bother to inform us or our security team), as the FBI agent was right there, following behind the jihadis, whom he had encouraged to “tear up Texas.” But even though they knew the attack was coming, they didn’t have a team in place to stop the jihadis. They had one man there, and one man only. The jihadis were not stopped by FBI agents, but by our own security team. If the jihadis had gotten through our team, they would have killed Pamela Geller and me, and many others. (They would no doubt have loved to kill Geert Wilders, but he left before they arrived.)
The Daily Beast wrote in August 2016 about how this undercover FBI agent encouraged the jihadis. The Beast’s Katie Zavadski wrote: “Days before an ISIS sympathizer attacked a cartoon contest in Garland, Texas, he received a text from an undercover FBI agent. ‘Tear up Texas,’ the agent messaged Elton Simpson days before he opened fire at the Draw Muhammad event, according to an affidavit (pdf) filed in federal court Thursday…”
But what was the FBI’s game in telling them to do that? Why didn’t they have a phalanx of agents in place, ready to stop the attack? Or did they want the attack to succeed, so that Barack Obama’s vow that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam” would be vividly illustrated, and intimidate any other Americans who might be contemplating defending the freedom of speech into silence?
We twice asked the FBI for an investigation into this matter. They have ignored us. Of course. After all, it isn’t as if this happened to someone important, like Linda Sarsour.
This is part of the problem with intel-based Law Enforcement. Nobody knows what is going on, so everybody on the outside ends up distrustful of everyone inside. It is possible a pro-Muslim leftist FBI agent tried to engender a terrorist attack on anti-Islamization activists he did not like, and then he split once it was underway, presuming he could argue that things just got out of control.
On the other hand, Police did kill the attackers, and there was a SWAT team with snipers on hand for the festivities. It is possible FBI arranged for Garland Police to have their most competent gun at the checkpoint supported by snipers, and briefed him on what was coming with the idea he (and maybe the snipers behind the scenes) would smoke these guys and end the threat in a permanent fashion. Then again, an unarmed security guard was there and did get shot, which would make it seem that if that were the plan, they would have taken officer safety more seriously in the plan, and arranged a better kill zone with better cover. I’d also think real time surveillance would have had the snipers ready to take the guys down on arrival before a shot was fired.
Given the facts, it is impossible to know exactly which scenario was the case. Did the FBI try to kill Robert and Pamela, or did it just use them as the cheese in their little Muslim mousetrap?
The problem with intel-based Law Enforcement for K-strategistsis the uncertainty. Leftists love uncertainty – it facilitates false realities. They can tell themselves anything that eases the amygdala, and live in whatever fantasy they want. When under stress, that can be even more tempting.
K-strategists do not like uncertainty. Did the FBI help these guys stage their attack? Was the FBI trying to kill us? Did the FBI want to clean up some trash that would have killed innocents somewhere or other in the future? This is not a story likely to foster warm feelings of safety and comfort with the Federal Government among K-strategists, who are naturally inclined to assume the worst of every situation they encounter as part of their reproductive strategy.
We’d much rather just see the video where an HRT leader told his shooter, “I want you to walk into the room and kill these Muslim shitbags.” Back in the days of Jelly Bryce, that was exactly what we got, and the K-strategists of America were quite happy with it.
We need the Apocalypse to bring those days back.
Tell everyone you know about r/K Theory, because we have no idea who is trying to kill us these days
[…] Did The FBI Try To Kill Robert Spencer And Pamela Geller? […]
Its easy to get caught up it conspiracy theories, because many are true. It helps to always go back to the source info though. For example there are only going to be more muslims in the West as time goes on, and it will likely be devastating. They build more nuclear weapons every year and radical ones try to sneak into corporations, nuclear power plants, and congress. They are violent when they don’t get what they want, and while many are idiots the really dangerous ones are smart. They have global intentions and middle eastern governments actively collude to undermine the West. Spencer may be wrong, but what if he is right. Too much risk. God Bless President Trump as he cleans out the trash in government. Let the swamp drain and Freedom ring.
2 words “medical jihad”
OT, but I thought you might want a chance to shoot back at agnostic for trashing your r/K selection theory:
http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2017/03/rk-theory-conservatives-r-liberals-k.html#comment-form
He basically calls conservatives r-selected because they marry young and have lots of children and kick their kids out of the house early. Also because they give generous welfare monies to blacks. He calls liberals K-selected because they spend lavishly on their children and keep them living at home until their 30’s. They also want to join ecology movements and shut down oil pipelines so that makes them against resource extraction.
Thank you.
A little heads up but I heard very reliable rumours, backed up by vague comments online with no connection between the two, that various uniforms have gone missing. Dozens at a time, mostly police, US and UK, some ambulance crew and a few military. Supposedly stolen for terror attacks or some kind of Apocalypse-level event in future. It is interesting to note the media never reported this fact and various uniformed people have died on-scene at attacks since, unidentified. The UK banned army men from walking round in public in uniform after Rigby. This can’t be a coincidence but guys, not everyone wearing a uniform is on your side.