Before Election Last Year

Over on facebook, a good friend of mine, who is also a Canadian and a staunch “Supporter of the American Constitution” as well as a “Right Winger” started a discussion on his page.  Over the course of several days there were dozens of comments, many of them were Left Wing trolls attacking him.

At one point I was defending various things, and the following is what I wrote there.  When I was finished, the only comment I received was from some guy saying “You need a girl friend”.  I explained that “I have a wife and she wouldn’t like that”.  His response was “Ask, you might be surprised.”

Is that seriously how Liberals think? It’s ok?  I mean if they can’t attack you with name calling, they try to drag you to their lowest level.

Today, the Right “owns” the White House, the House and Senate.  The Left “owns” the disaster of Barack Obama, and the near destruction of the American Economy.  They can’t come to grips with that, but can continue to call Trump a “racist”, “rapist” and all the other things.  Now that the “memo” is out, how many heads will roll?  Probably none.

Anyway, the following is a copy of the comments I made through the discussion.  It’s historical now.

—————————

Please allow me to educate some of the people here. This is what ” Progressivism” is about. They HATE that America was founded on it’s guiding principles. They HATE the Founding Fathers. They HATE the Constitution. They will use it only to gain benefit while usurping power from the People of the United States. They will use hate, name calling, mis-characterization, projection, dismissal, and denigration to gain their goal, which is the destruction of American Principles and the burning of the US Constitution. Progressives are the ENEMY of Americans, and America. They are NOT our friends. They walk hand-in-hand with Communists, Marxists and Socialists and hide among these people calling themselves “Social Democrats”. This is FACT. Not some of the BS they bandy about to convince others of their “good” to society.

The Progressives were reformers in the late 19th and early 20th century who believed that in order to address modern problems, America needed to abandon the old ideas of the Founding in favor of a new expansive conception of the role of government. Progressives paved the way for modern liberalism and politics, and their core ideas are still the mainstay of today’s liberalism.

Some Progressives were prominent journalists such as Herbert Croly (co-founder of The New Republic), some were distinguished professors such as John Dewey and Woodrow Wilson (president of Princeton before he was President of the U.S.), and many were political leaders such as Theodore Roosevelt and Robert La Follette. Progressives could be found in both political parties: Wilson was a Democrat, Roosevelt was a Republican.

The Progressives were united in their contempt for what they called the “individualism” of the Founding. Instead of a government that protects natural rights through limited, decentralized powers, they envisioned an expansive government, a “living” and evolving Constitution, and the rule of “experts” in nationally centralized administrative agencies.

Whereas the Founders believed the government had a well-defined and limited role to play in the lives of citizens—essentially leaving people alone to lead their lives—the Progressives favored a much more active role for the government in overseeing civil society, regulating the economy, and redistributing wealth.

These two fundamentally different understandings of the role of government grow out of two different understandings of freedom. For the Progressives, freedom is not secured when government protects natural rights and otherwise leaves citizens to rule themselves. True freedom, by this view, demands an active government that provides equal means to self-fulfillment for all. It is not enough to create the conditions that allow people to pursue their own happiness—equal opportunity—since some citizens start with more advantages than others. Government must set out to level the playing field and determine outcomes.

To ensure that all citizens possess all they need to attain happiness, government must create an environment in which all possess the same advantages, despite the fact that this requires government to interfere with the very natural rights the Founders sought to secure. Government must redistribute wealth and grant benefits in order to ensure that everyone has equal means to pursue happiness, and must provide economic and social resources to develop the social character of citizens.

This is why LIBERALS are also the enemy today: Liberalism can be understood in two very different ways. Liberalism, or what some call “classical liberalism,” is a political philosophy based on individual liberty and limited government. Over the last century, however, liberalism has come to take on a different meaning. The contemporary understanding of liberalism is based not on individual liberty, but on the use of government to grant benefits and advantages in order to give everyone the ability to achieve a certain standard of living and reduce inequalities. Therefore, modern liberalism encourages an extensive network of interest groups that receive benefits from government and organize in order to preserve those benefits.

Modern liberalism grows out of the Progressive rejection of American constitutionalism and an embrace of a new conception of freedom, anchored in big government. There are however certain significant differences between Progressivism and modern liberalism.

Whereas modern liberalism exalts freedom of self-expression, especially sexual liberation, most Progressives embraced traditional morals. Liberals are also obsessed with equality of outcomes in ways that the Progressives were not. Today, liberalism has lost the faith in progress that characterized Progressivism, mostly because of a loss of confidence in the inevitability of progress and the creeping effects of having embraced relativism from the start of the Progressive movement.

The administrative state is the conglomeration of federal administrative agencies—whether executive agencies, executive departments, or independent regulatory commissions—that have become a “fourth branch” of government. Power has in effect been transferred from the representative, constitutional institutions—Congress, the President, and the courts—to administrative agencies and bureaucrats.

The administrative state is the conglomeration of federal administrative agencies—whether executive agencies, executive departments, or independent regulatory commissions—that have become a “fourth branch” of government. Power has in effect been transferred from the representative, constitutional institutions—Congress, the President, and the courts—to administrative agencies and bureaucrats.

Although our civics textbooks still describe a government where Congress makes laws, the President executes laws, and courts adjudicate disputes, this is not the way our government actually works. Today, bureaucrats make law, execute law, and adjudicate. Although the laws made by agencies are called rules, they carry the force of law.

The administrative state is inconsistent with the U.S. Constitution. Article I, section 1 of the Constitution states that all legislative powers shall be vested in Congress, yet Congress has transferred its powers to these agencies.

Furthermore, the Constitution clearly requires the separation of powers, yet powers are combined in administrative agencies. Finally, many agency personnel are un-elected and unaccountable, despite the republican principles on which the Constitution is based.

There are lots of people out there who think Barack Obama was a great president. OK, fine. Whatever. Answer me this though…

We have money for the following:

Syrian and Middle Eastern unvetted ‘refugees’
Illegal Immigrants
Vacations for the President

We do NOT have money for:
Military Pay Raises
Military equipment that is needed just to SUSTAIN the force
Veterans Medical Care
Veterans Retirement

The Marine Corps is the most relied on Military Force outside of US Special Operations Command. They are the most overused forces of the most overused Military in the WORLD.

So, please explain something to me:

How do we have funds for illegals and potentional Terrorists, but not to upgrade the Marine Corps from Vietnam Era helicopters to the SAME MODERN helicopters THE REST OF THE MILITARY IS USING?

How do we have funds for endless Obamas’ vacations, but we cant find enough $$$$$$ for parts to keep more than 1/3 of Marine Corps Fighter Jets DEPLOYED TO WARZONES flying?????

We have money for Social Justice Crap, But we Have VETERANS BEING LEFT TO DIE BY THE VA, and NO ONE at the VA being held accountable?????

It’s time to Make America Great Again.

Advertisements

Your American Identity

Over the past few decades, the Left has worked diligently to steal your identity from you. Not your name, or credit card numbers, but the absolutism of who “You” are.  If you’re white, a male, around 40 or older, working for a living and taking care of your family, or your older now, like myself and “white, retired, and OLD” by their standards, the Left labels you as a danger to society.

If you are Black you’re being oppressed – by “White people”.

If you’re an illegal alien, you’re an – “Undocumented immigrant”.

If you’re Muslim – you’re being racially discriminated against by “white people”.

If you own a gun – you’re evil.

If you support the 2nd Amendment – you MUST be part of the NRA. (No, I’m not.)

If you’re “white” – then you are probably a KKK member, a White Supremacist, or some other such thing. (even if you’re not)

And on and on.

A box. You’ve been placed into a box by the Left.  You are routinely called “Racist” or “Homophobe” or perhaps you’re called “Privileged” or some other names. This is to disconnect you from reality, who you are, and that for which you stand and believe.

The Left has this ability to put a label on someone to disconnect them from reality, and then use it collectively in a disproportionate manner, thereby disconnecting people from their own, true selves.

The Left dehumanize people to attack them, and make the attacks easier by the collective mob mentality they use. A new name (yes, they call you a name), to target you, then the others of their kind glom onto the name and they use it too.  That’s how the left functions.

The Left have sharpened this “weapon” of their’s over the years since the 60s. NOW, they use it to divide Americans.

You can see it in Facebook, Twitter and Gab. The folks who are “Nazi” and KKK types are all over the place… and the rest of us normal people are caught in the middle trying to redefine ourselves as “NOT being THEM”.

Just because you’re white does not make you a racist.  But the Left uses this tactic to make you think you are, and make others assume you are..  The Left is teaching this to your children and attempting to shame them and be ashamed of themselves because, well, you know, “White Privilege”.

Redefining a generation of Children to believe things differently from the way their parents believed is a stock trademark of the Left, and of Communism and Marxism.

Marxist tell you they aren’t Communists.  Communists hate Marxists. Supposedly.

The Left claims not to be Marxist, and yet look at the dumb asses walking about with Che Guverra Tee Shits on their bodies.  He’s a hero to these morons.

This author believes that 90% of everyone, right, left, middle, black, white – doesn’t matter – of Americans (Real Americans who understand what being American means) are none of these things above.  We don’t fit in boxes, pigeon holes, cupboards or waste bins.

We are Individuals.  We want SMALLER Government, less money taken from us, efficiency, Freedom to do as we like as long as what we are doing isn’t hurting others.  We believe in Individual Freedom and do NOT want Socialized medicine, shopping or funding such programs.  We want others to to be happy, and free as well.

We think criminals should be locked up, and dangerous people who’ve committed crimes like Murder locked up for good, or executed.  We do not believe that the Government should be able to deprive you of Life, Liberty and Happiness on a whim, in other words, LaVoy Finicum was murdered and his family deprived of a good man by a corrupt government.  (FBI, DOJ, Clinton Foundation, Uranium)

Chris Stevens was also deprived of his life, by corruption in our government, and no one has been held accountable yet. (Clinton)

The IRS targeted Christians and Right Winger through the use of “taxes” and let other groups go by default.  No one has been held accountable for that either. (Lois Lerner)

Those are a few small things the Obama Administration wrought.

The Left STRIVES to keep your minds off those things and mis-identification of your self is how they do it.  So, the time to stop letting them change your life, your name, your identity is now.  Focus on the real causes of Cancer in our Society.  Focus on the Left and fight back.

While I know most of you want to be “above it all” and “won’t lower yourselves to their tactics” (and this is very noble) we’re in a war here.  A war for our Identity in America.  You must start fighting back using their own tactics and stratagems.  No longer can you sit on your ass and let them win over your children’s minds.  Do not let them have the upper hand any longer.

Trump gave up a life of leisure, and his power to become President, to Represent YOU.

Don’t let him fail, and don’t fail to stop the Left at every turn.

72 DHS Employees on Terrorist Watch List

Well, I have a question.  Actually, several questions.

Why are they on the watch list?

If they are on the watch list, why?

If they are on the watch list, why are they working for the DHS?

If they are on the watch list, do they have clearances?  If so, why?

If they are terrorists, connected to terrorism, are Muslim then why haven’t they 1) been fired, 2) had clearances revoked, 3) Named, 4) deported?

If they are Americans, what form of due process was used to place them on a no-fly list?

If they are actually adjudicated then why can they buy guns?

You see, it takes a few questions to get to the meat of the matter but apparently no one is asking questions, are they?  Especially not this President.


Jeh Johnson / AP

BY: Adam Kredo
December 6, 2015 4:12 pm

At least 72 employees at the Department of Homeland Security are listed on the U.S. terrorist watch list, according to a Democratic lawmaker.

Rep. Stephen Lynch (D., Mass.) disclosed that a congressional investigation recently found that at least 72 people working at DHS also “were on the terrorist watch list.”

“Back in August, we did an investigation—the inspector general did—of the Department of Homeland Security, and they had 72 individuals that were on the terrorist watch list that were actually working at the Department of Homeland Security,” Lynch told Boston Public Radio.

“The [former DHS] director had to resign because of that,” he said.

DHS continues to fail inspections aimed at determining the efficiency of its internal safety mechanisms, as well as its efforts to protect the nation.

Lynch referred to a recent report that found the Transportation Security Administration, which is overseen by DHS, failed to stop 95 percent of those who attempted to bring restricted items past airport security.

“We had staffers go into eight different airports to test the department of homeland security screening process at major airports. They had a 95 percent failure rate,” Lynch said. “We had folks—this was a testing exercise, so we had folks going in there with guns on their ankles, and other weapons on their persons, and there was a 95 percent failure rate.”

Lynch said he has “very low confidence” in DHS based on its many failures over the years. For this reason, he voted in favor of recent legislation that will tighten the vetting process for any Syrian refugees applying for asylum in the United States.

“I have very low confidence based on empirical data that we’ve got on the Department of Homeland Security. I think we desperately need another set of eyeballs looking at the vetting process,” he said. “That’s vetting that’s being done at major airports where we have a stationary person coming through a facility, and we’re failing 95 percent of the time.”

“I have even lower confidence that they can conduct the vetting process in places like Jordan, or Belize or on the Syrian border, or in Cairo, or Beirut in any better fashion, especially given the huge volume of applicants we’ve had seeking refugee status,” Lynch said.

 

Texas Secession Passes State Republican Party Resolutions Committee Vote

http://www.breitbart.com/texas/2015/12/04/texas-secession-passes-state-republican-party-resolutions-committee-vote/

 

A resolution that would put Texas secession on the ballot for Republican primary voters has cleared its first hurdle by passing the Republican Party of Texas’ Resolution Committee. The committee met during a regular meeting of the State Republican Executive Committee (SREC).

The resolution was submitted to a vote by the resolutions committee after language was agreed upon.

Six people spoke for the resolution and no one spoke against it. The resolution passed by a vote of 7 to 4.

As passed, the wording of the resolution is as follows:

If the federal government continues to disregard the Constitution and the sovereignty of the State of Texas, the State of Texas and its people should reassert its prior status as an independent nation.

Those members of the committee voting in favor of the resolution include: Bonnie Lugo, SD13; Terri DuBose, SD19; Karl Voigtsberger, SD8; John W. Beckmeyer, SD28; Naomi Narvaiz, SD21; Henry Childs, SD19; and Marvin Clede, SD17.

Opposed to the resolution were: Committee Chairman Mark Ramsey, SD7; Davita Stike, SD14; Sam Dalton, SD20; and David Halvorson, SD12.

The resolution will now be submitted on Saturday to the full body (62 members) of the SREC.

The committeewoman who presented the resolution, Tanya Robertson, SD11, said Texas independence should be put before the voters because Texans are dissatisfied with Washington D.C. representatives and excessive federal government spending.

Robertson told Breitbart Texas, “We made it through the Resolution Committee and will take it up on the floor tomorrow at the regular SREC meeting. Thanks to the seven members of the SREC Resolutions Committee who voted to move the Texas Independence initiative to the floor for a fair debate. They listened to the conservative grassroots of Texas today and it is very much appreciated!”

The SREC committeewoman who represents parts of Harris, Galveston, and Brazoria counties added, “The committee veered from the agenda today and accepted testimony from the Texans who were observing today. All of the testimony was passionately in-favor of allowing Texans to voice their opinion on this issue. Our prayer is that the body of the State Republican Executive Committee will adhere to the will of the conservative people of Texas.”

Texas Nationalist Movement President Daniel Miller told Breitbart Texas, “We’re obviously excited and hopeful. This was not the first step or the last step. It was another step. We know that Texans want a vote on independence and we’ll continue to work to ensure that Texans get it.” “It’s interesting to note that our proposition received more committee votes than nearly every hot button issue. People want to be heard on this issue.”

As reported by Breitbart Texas, Texas Republican State Party Chairman Tom Mechler has predicted that he did not believe there was support within the State Republican Executive Committee to approve the resolution.

Dwayne Stovall, who ran against Senator

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX)

57%

during the last election and is currently running against Representative

Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX)

67%

, told Breitbart Texas, “Listening to committee members discuss a resolution on independence was a great example of how little understanding most of us have about the federal system of government on which the U.S. Constitution is based.” Stovall supports the right of Texans to vote on the issue of Texas independence.If the resolution passes the SREC and is submitted to primary voters, it would be a non-binding resolution.

Lana Shadwick is a contributing writer and legal analyst for Breitbart Texas. She has served as an associate judge and prosecutor. Follow her on Twitter @LanaShadwick2.

Editor’s Note: This article has been updated with additional information.

Why there is a problem with gun laws

Why do you need to own an ugly black rifle capable of shooting 2-4 rounds per second with the mere pull of a trigger?

Why do you need to be able to buy a thousand rounds?

Why do you NEED high capacity magazines?

I have a better question.  Why do you ask?

Seriously though, when I am asked these questions, sometimes it is difficult getting through to the people who ask.  They are asking the questions rhetorically and do not require, nor even WISH you give an answer.  In fact, they want you to splutter and hem and haw, and feel threatened and guilty.

Why are there gun control laws to begin with?  Why are there people on a no-fly list who can purchase guns?  Why are there people who should be in mental institutions who can purchase weapons?

These are the better questions.

The BEST question though is. if  criminal commits a crime using a gun, say, murder, why isn’t he adjudicated as a murderer and executed? Why aren’t people who are mentally defective put in mental institutions?

So many questions, so few answers, right?

Wrong.

Let’s look at the last questions first.

Because people believe that folks who are mentally deranged shouldn’t be placed in institutions.  Do-gooders for the past hundred years have fought to remove people from mental institutions and indeed, shut down such places.  The same people fought to have “privacy” added to medical records.

Now they wish to reverse this trend.  They would love to know if everyone out there is considered “sane” or not… but it’s not their business any more.

Then, they would like to ask you questions at the doctors office (and I have experienced this personally, so this isn’t some vacuous statement) about your ownership of guns; or whether you have “recently felt like harming yourself or others”.

Let me address the title; no-fly lists.  How does one even get ON a no-fly list?  And why are they on it?  Because they might blow up a plane with a 4 ounce bottle of shampoo?  Or because you spoke out against the US government because you’re dissatisfied with their work ethic?

Both, actually.  If you are a terrorist, you might wish to blow up a plane and perhaps you’ve made it clear, because, for instance you MIGHT belong to Islam.  Islam has made it abundantly clear they wish to kill Americans (and Jews, and Europeans, and Whites, Blacks, Asians, whomever, and wish to do so with impunity… because you’re an INFIDEL).  And you might have made a statement against the US government for their over-reaching, heavy-handed nonsense and you’re questioning their ability to be useful any more.

And with good reason.  You’re an American Citizen questioning the government, because YOU are a watchdog.  YOU are supposed to question the country’s leaders as a dutiful citizen.  Making sure they are doing their job, and doing it for the benefit of the people, and not themselves.

If you’re a terrorist you should BE on a no-fly list, in particular to prevent further training as a terrorist, and secondarily to that to prevent you from blowing up the damned plane.  You should NOT be able to purchase a gun.

If you’re a citizen questioning your government, you should NOT be a no-fly list, no matter which politician, party or group is running the White House this week.  In fact, you should not be on that list, you should NOT be questioned about your questioning, and you SHOULD be allowed to purchase a gun.

Or ten of them.  Or a hundred.

You should not be considered a threat, mentally defective, you should not be considered a person of interest and should be left the hell alone.

In the United States you have a right to your opinion, to express it, Freedom of Speech, Assembly, and to cross state lines and come and go as you please.  No one should be bothering you.

The second you actually commit a crime of course, that all goes out the window.

Now – I’m not going to answer all the above questions.  But I’m going to explain this, carefully for the slow readers out there….

If you are not a criminal (and that includes people who have committed non-capital offenses in the past and have served their time) should not be denied their rights.  They should not be placed on watch lists.  They should not be denied guns, freedom of speech, travel or assembly.

The Progressives in this country (Read: Liberals/Marxists/Communists/Libtards/Democrats and morons) are using words to push their agenda.  They want to be able to place ANYONE on a no-fly, watch list and thereby prevent them from buying, holding, using, storing or otherwise have rights to guns.

In other words, the idea of background checks is to see if someone doesn’t meet a certain criteria;  that criteria will be decided by whome EVER is in charge of the current government, be it GOP, Democrats, Obama, Leftist, Rightist, Libertarian, Marixist, Commie, Pinko or whatever….

Therein lies the problem.

Everyone wants to TRUST the government and it’s time to distrust them with all your hearts.

Our government is supposed to be by the people and for the people; not for themselves, not for profit, not to control us, not to have power.

Do not trust a politician who says they will “ban guns”.  Or implement regulations to “check backgrounds” because quite honestly, who is going to watch the watchers?????

You see, we already have several thousand gun laws on the books, federal, state, local, wish lists and made up stuff that some local “authority” can invoke at their whim.  Those rules, laws, city regulations, county statutes are all there for one thing.  To prevent you and me from having a normal, healthy, happy life pursuing whatever business we like, go where we wish and drink the beer we like.

You see my friends gun control isn’t about guns.

It’s about control.

No-fly lists are great if you’re preventing terrorists.  Not so good if you’re preventing granny or grandpa from boarding a plane to go home for Christmas.  Or stopping Joe Blow because he happens to have expressed dissatisfaction with a government policy of allowing in random illegal immigrants (who didn’t go through normal regulations and procedures to get into the country).

Our country is under siege.  Siege from illegals, from terrorists, from people who want to “change” our country to something it is not, and was never intended to be.

We are here to prevent the latter, more than anything.  And we will do so.

No more gun laws will be enacted.

No more “refugees” will be let in, or they will be run out.

NO more Obamas in office.  No more Clintons in office.  They had their day. And have ruined our country.

If you don’t like guns, by God move someplace where guns are already illegal.  If you don’t like the idea this is a Capitalist country, move to a Communist country.  I was here first, and my country was the way it was before you tried to screw it up.  If you don’t like the fact you can’t get some rich guys money split up amongst all your homies… then homie, move the fuck out of my country and leave the guys alone that have the money.

Those guys create jobs.  Or maybe you should just get a job?

The greatest problem with gun control is that anyone can be placed on a list, adjudicated as mentally defective and prevented from exercising their rights.

‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’ to be Prosecuted – US Attorney-General Loretta Lynch

‘Anti-Muslim Rhetoric’ to be Prosecuted – US Attorney-General Loretta Lynch

U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch on Thursday defended Muslims after the San Bernardino, California, shooting on Wednesday that killed 14 people and wounded 17 others, adding that federal officials would take action in case of anti muslim rhetoric and activity.

“When we see the potential for someone to lift, lifting that mantle of anti muslim rhetoric or as we saw after 9/11 violence directed at individuals who may not even be Muslims but may be perceived to be Muslims and they will suffer just as well, just as much, and when we see that we will take action,” -US Attorney-General Loretta Lynch.

Many community members said they were concerned about a backlash against the Muslim community in view of the rise of Islamic State and some opposition among politicians and the public in the United States over U.S. plans to accept Syrian war refugees.

The couple suspected of killing 14 people at a holiday party in California amassed thousands of rounds of ammunition and a dozen pipe bombs, authorities said on Thursday as they sought clues to the pair’s motives and whether they had links to Islamist militants.

Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, and his wife, Tashfeen Malik, 27, were killed in a shootout with police five hours after Wednesday’s massacre at the Inland Regional Center social services agency in the city of San Bernardino, about 60 miles (100 km) east of Los Angeles.

Farook, a U.S. citizen born in Illinois, was the son of Pakistani immigrants, according to Hussam Ayloush, who heads the Los Angeles area chapter of the Muslim advocacy group Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

Malik, who had a 6-month-old daughter with Farook, was a Pakistani native living in Saudi Arabia when they married, Ayloush said.

The director of the Islamic Center of Riverside, a mosque Farook attended regularly for two years, described him as a devout Muslim who made the pilgrimage to Mecca in Saudi Arabia a few years ago and celebrated his wedding reception at the mosque.

 

——–

Loretta Lynch, a Muslim Lover and an Islamic bitch.

Fuck you Loretta Lynch.

Fuck ISIS.

Fuck Obama.

Fuck Islam.

Fuck the Muslims.

That friends is what is commonly called “Freedom of Speech”.

I DARE anyone to try to take it from me. I will kill you dead before you do. And while I might die in the process, I will die a Free Man, not a Muslim convert or a slave in a prison of this fucking dictator.

The shit is about to get Real…..

 

 

Terrorism – plain and simple

Arsenal of explosives, ammunition found at home of San Bernardino attackers as FBI seeks motive

December 3 at 7:05 PM   
Play Video3:21

San Bernardino police chief: 12 pipe bombs found in attackers’ home

Police in San Bernardino, Calif., held a news conference about the ongoing investigation into the mass shooting that occurred at a county holiday party on Wednesday. An investigation into the shooters’ home uncovered 12 pipe bombs in the building. (Reuters)

SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. — Authorities said Thursday they are looking for a motive behind the deadliest U.S. mass shooting in nearly three years, even as they revealed that the attackers had amassed a stockpile of explosives and ammunition.

The rampage by two shooters Wednesday killed 14 people and wounded 21. Four hours later, 23 law enforcement officers from seven different agencies engaged in a frenzied shootout that left the two suspects — a husband and wife — dead on a residential street.

The FBI has taken over the investigation, with authorities scrutinizing three crime scenes: The Inland Regional Center, the site of the mass shooting; the street in San Bernardino where the police and the suspects had their gun battle; and the rented home in Redlands where authorities said the suspects had an arsenal of pipe bombs and thousands of rounds of ammunition.

Police said Syed Rizwan Farook, 28, a county health worker born in Chicago, and Tashfeen Malik, 27, his Pakistani wife in the U.S. on a visa, were both dressed in tactical gear and armed with rifles, handguns and multiple ammunition magazines when they strode into a holiday party for county workers Wednesday morning. They opened fire, spraying 65 to 75 rounds and leaving behind an unexploded pipe bomb before fleeing in a rented black Ford Expedition.

Authorities on Thursday afternoon identified the victims of the shooting, listing their names, ages and cities: Shannon Johnson, 45, Los Angeles; Bennetta Bet-Badal, 46, Rialto; Aurora Godoy, 26, San Jacinto; Isaac Amanios, 60, Fontana; Larry Kaufman, 42, Rialto; Harry Bowman, 46, Upland; Yvette Velasco, 27, Fontana; Sierra Clayborn, 27, Moreno Valley; Robert Adams, 40, Yucaipa; Nicholas Thalasinos, 52, Colton; Tin Nguyen, 31, Santa Ana; Juan Espinoza, 50, Highland; Damian Meins, 58, Riverside; and Michael Wetzel, 37, Lake Arrowhead.

Farook had been with his colleagues at the party earlier in the morning, police said. Authorities could not say conclusively whether there had been a dispute that led to Farook leaving the party. But police said a survivor of the shooting told them that Farook slipped away prior to the massacre. When police checked the name, they saw that Farook had rented an SUV that matched the description of the suspected getaway car.

That led authorities to stake out the couple’s home in Redlands. When the SUV rolled by, and then sped away, police chased it until the SUV stopped on San Bernardino Avenue, a few miles from the massacre. Police said the suspects fired 76 rifle rounds; police fired 380. The SUV, so riddled with bullets that it looked like it had been hit with a bomb, was due back at the rental agency that day, police said.

No one saw this attack coming. Farook’s supervisor, Amanda Adair, who went to college with Farook, told The Post, “He got along with everybody, but he kept his distance. I can’t imagine it was about work.”

She said she had no inkling that he might be plotting a mass shooting.

“Nothing seemed out of the ordinary. He didn’t seem like he was going to kill everybody. He just seemed quiet,” she said.

“We do not yet know the motive,” David Bow­dich, assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Los Angeles office, said at a news conference. “It would be irresponsible and premature for me to call this terrorism.”

“At this stage, we do not yet know why this terrible event occurred,” President Obama said at the White House. “It is possible this was terrorist-related, but we don’t know. It is also possible this was workplace related.”

Officials were looking at social media contacts between one of the suspected attackers and people with ties to terrorism. So far the connections appear insignificant. A senior U.S. law enforcement official said Farook was in contact with persons of interest with possible ties to terrorism. Some of the contacts, which were years old, were made through social media.

“These were not substantial contacts,” the official said. “Those contacts would not have put him on our radar. We certainly saw that contact but it was insignificant. You’re allowed to like someone’s Facebook page.”

The official said the FBI has yet to find definitive evidence that the couple had been radicalized or were looking at jihadist websites or reading terrorist literature such as Inspire magazine.

“It’s very odd,” the official said. “It appears they were a happy couple of the Muslim faith.” ​

Police said after the shooting spree and a bloody gun battle in the streets here, they found 12 “pipe bomb-type devices” at the home in Redlands, along with thousands of rounds of ammunition. Another set of three pipe bombs combined into one — and designed to be triggered by remote control from a car, although the device apparently malfunctioned — was also found at the scene of the mass shooting, authorities said.

Officials said the two attackers were killed after nearly two dozen police officers engaged in a firefight with them. Police also found more than 1,600 rounds of ammunition on the attackers, suggesting they were prepared for a long siege.

“The FBI is chasing down any contacts these two may have had and whether those contacts are indicative of radicalization or external plotting or are purely incidental,” said Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee.

Schiff, citing a briefing Thursday on the attack, said that “on the basis of what I heard and where the [FBI] was I wouldn’t conclude that there was radicalization here.”

Still, Schiff said it did not appear to be “an act of spontaneous workplace violence,” but he added that it could have been the culmination of a longer-term grievance with the attacker’s employer.

Authorities said at the news conference that they had gathered a number of items they were using to probe the digital trail of the suspects, including thumb drives, computers and cellphones that were being analyzed.

“There appears to be a degree of planning that went into this,” San Bernardino Police Chief Jarrod Burguan said. “Nobody just gets upset at a party, goes home and puts together that kind of elaborate scheme or plan.”

Play Video1:50

What we know about the San Bernardino attackers

After the mass shooting in San Bernardino, Calif., on Wednesday that left 14 people dead, details are starting to emerge about the two shooters. Here’s what we know about Syed Farook and Tashfeen Malik. (The Washington Post)

“They came prepared to do what they did, as if they were on a mission,” Burguan said during an earlier news conference.

Authorities said Thursday morning that the injury toll had risen to 21 people, an increase from the 17 people they previously said were wounded. Two law enforcement officials were also injured during the shootout with the suspects, but the wounds are not life-threatening, police said.

About 300 local, county, state and federal law enforcement officers responded to the scene, a massive response to the country’s deadliest mass shooting since the Sandy Hook massacre in 2012.

Police say they had recovered four weapons: Two assault rifles and two 9mm pistols, all of which were legally purchased, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Two of these weapons were traced back to one of the assailants, said Dannette Seward, a spokeswoman for the ATF, while the other two were traced to another person. That is still being investigated, she said.

The attack came just five days after police say a gunman in Colorado Springs killed three people and injured nine others, the latest in a recent run of mass shootings that terrorized a community college in Roseburg, Ore., a church in Charleston, S.C., and a movie theater in Lafayette, La.

Anxiety also lingers from the recent terrorist attacks in Paris that killed 130 people. The Islamic State, a violent militant group that controls parts of Syria and Iraq, claimed responsibility for that attack that triggered a crackdown on migrants in Europe and calls for heightened security in the United States.

Even as evidence was being collected and analyzed, with some flown to an FBI lab in Washington, police outlined a massive stockpile of ammunition and weapons, suggesting that further bloodshed may have been possible. In addition to the 12 pipe bombs and extra rounds, police say they found materials that could have been used to produce additional bombs.

“Clearly, they were equipped and could have continued to do another attack,” Burguan said.

The police chief said they did not appear to have a specific target in the morning attack.

“They sprayed the room with bullets,” Burguan said. “I don’t know that there was any one person that they ultimately targeted.”

Before the attack, they dropped off their 6-month-old daughter with Farook’s mother, saying they had a doctor’s appointment, said Hussam Ayloush, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations in Los Angeles.

Farook was at the gathering for a time before leaving, but it was unclear why, Burguan said. He said that some indications were that Farook was angry, but another witness said Farook seemed to just disappear.

Burguan repeatedly said it did not appear likely that a dispute at the party could have been the sole cause of the massacre.

“I don’t think they grabbed the guns and tactical gear on a spur-of-the-moment thing,” Burguan said.

The Islamic Society of Corona-Norco, a mosque that Farook’s brother-in-law Farhan Khan has attended, was quiet Thursday. Perched on a scenic road in Corona, about 30 minutes from San Bernardino, the center is undergoing a major construction project; scaffolding surrounds a new prayer building now being built.

Jess Abed, a longtime active member of the mosque community who said he did not know Farook, said Muslims in the area were on “on edge” after Wednesday’s events.

“When you hear a Muslim name” associated with one of the suspects, there is concern about conclusions that people may draw, said Abed, who is originally from Jordan.

Ray Abboud, who has also attended the mosque for years, said Muslims in the community were horrified by the shooting. He said he shares the concerns that the public will paint Muslims with one brush.

“It breaks our hearts to see 14 people die,” he said. “We feel sorry everything that happened but we can’t blame ourselves for being Muslim.”

He said people in the community were keeping a close watch on their children “to make sure they don’t fall into any crazy stuff.”

Muslim community leader Ayloush described Malik as a Pakistani-born immigrant who lived in Saudi Arabia before marrying Farook. Two FBI officials told The Washington Post that Farook was not under FBI investigation. It’s not clear whether he had links to any other people under FBI investigation.

A third person seen fleeing the shootout was also taken into custody, but it remained unclear whether there was any link to the couple.

“Right now, as we continue to drill down our information, it looks like we have two shooters,” Burguan said. “We are comfortable that the two shooters that went into the building are the two shooters that are deceased.”

“I have no idea why he would do something like this,” Farhan Khan, who is married to Farook’s sister, said at a news conference. “I cannot express how sad I am today.”

The two left behind little in the way of a paper trail — no apparent criminal record, no Facebook page or Twitter account. Speaking to the Los Angeles Times, co-workers who knew Farook described him as a quiet and polite man who held no obvious grudges against people in the office. They said he recently traveled to Saudi Arabia and returned with a woman he met online.

The office had recently held a shower for the couple’s new baby, and the two seemed to be “living the American dream,” said Patrick Baccari, a fellow inspector who shared a cubicle with Farook.

Berman and Achenbach reported from Washington. Freelance writers Martha Grove and William Dauber in San Bernardino and staff writers Greg Miller, Brian Murphy, Adam Goldman, Lindsey Bever, Niraj Chokshi, Ann Gerhart, Sari Horwitz, Elahe Izadi, Wesley Lowery, Eli Saslow, Kevin Sullivan, Julie Tate, Justin Wm. Moyer, Yanan Wang, Sarah Kaplan and Alice Crites in Washington contributed to this report.

[This story has been updated. First published: 11:30 a.m.]

%d bloggers like this: