Connect with us

International

ISIS supporter used Canada in terror plot to massacre New York City Jews, motivated by October 7th Hamas attack on Israel: FBI

Published

7 minute read

The BureauNews release from The Bureau

United States investigators disrupted the anti-Semitic terror plot of a 20-year-old Pakistani citizen residing in Canada, who was preparing to cross the U.S.-Canada border to carry out a mass shooting at Jewish religious centers in New York City. His aim was to unleash bloodshed on October 7, 2024, marking the anniversary of Hamas’ deadly incursion from Gaza into Israel.

According to an FBI complaint on September 4, 2024, Muhammad Shahzeb Khan, an ISIS supporter, was en route to the border, having told undercover agents he had secured funding for the operation—even texting a photo showing stacks of Canadian currency—and bragging he was “locked and loaded” for the attack.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Undercover officers and informants had infiltrated the suspect’s network in Canada, intercepting online and encrypted communications, gathering months of evidence that detailed his plans to target Jewish civilians and religious institutions in Brooklyn. Khan believed the city’s large Jewish population made it the perfect site to inflict maximum casualties.

“Brothers, hear me out, why not we do an attack in New York,” Khan texted to FBI agents. “[The] population of Jews in New York City is 1 million,” he continued, explaining he had scanned Google Earth maps of various New York neighborhoods and could see “tons of Jews walking around,” and “we could rack up easily a lot of Jews.”

Khan’s murderous intentions weren’t limited to a single attack in New York City. The FBI’s complaint alleges he sought to form an “offline cell” of ISIS supporters in the U.S., coordinating multiple assaults on Jewish targets.

And demonstrating his intent and some level of sophistication in terror financing and money laundering, Khan discussed plans to fund and arm ISIS operators in the United States with AR-style rifles through cross-border cryptocurrency accounts.

This disrupted ISIS-related plot comes amid broader fears in the U.S. about the risks posed by Canada’s immigration policies. Recently, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio expressed concern over Canada’s acceptance of Palestinian refugees from Gaza. In a letter to U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, Rubio warned that the refugee program could increase the risk of individuals with ties to terror groups gaining easier access to the U.S., complicating efforts to secure the border.

The FBI’s investigation also highlights the resurgence of ISIS-linked terrorism in North America.

The group and its affiliates have claimed responsibility for major attacks worldwide, including the November 2015 Paris attacks that killed 130 people, the 2016 Brussels bombings that left 32 dead, and the Nice truck attack, which killed over 80. More recently, ISIS-linked groups carried out bombings in Kerman, Iran, in 2024, killing 94 people, and a deadly assault on a concert hall in Moscow that same year, which claimed at least 60 lives.

The FBI’s case against Khan, filed three days ago in the Southern District of New York, alleges that he began discussing his plan in July 2024 with undercover agents he believed to be fellow ISIS supporters.

He initially considered targeting “City-1,” but dismissed it as insufficient, stating, “City-1 is nothing compared to NYC” because it had “only 175k Jews.”

On July 31, 2024, Khan elaborated on his vision of a coordinated attack, telling the undercover agents he envisioned six attackers splitting into three teams to “launch three attacks simultaneously on different locations, maximizing the casualty count.”

Khan continued to communicate with the undercover agents throughout August, referencing a failed ISIS attack in Toronto as evidence of law enforcement vigilance and urging heightened caution. He emphasized that their “cell should be small and well-armed” and that they should avoid social media to stay under the radar.

To enter the U.S., Khan arranged for a human smuggler to help him cross the border from Canada, planning to travel to New York City and then by bus to his attack location.

By early September, Canadian authorities began tracking Khan’s movements. On the morning of September 4, 2024, RCMP officers observed Khan entering a vehicle in Toronto, traveling toward Napanee, Ontario. After transferring to a second vehicle with a new driver, Khan continued eastbound toward Montreal, intending to cross the U.S.-Canada border from Quebec.

His plans became more detailed as he neared his attack date. He identified Jewish religious centers in Brooklyn, sending the undercover agents a photograph of a specific area inside one center where he intended to carry out the attack. He also urged the agents to acquire firearms, ammunition, and tactical gear, instructing them to purchase “some good hunting [knives] so we can slit their throats.”

Khan intended to time his assault with Jewish religious events, ensuring maximum casualties, and planned to record a video pledging allegiance to ISIS and send it to the group’s media outlet, Amaq, to claim responsibility.

The evidence also provides chilling insight into the psychology and beliefs that drive ISIS supporters. On August 18, Khan sent the undercover agents a document urging them to read it, explaining that “a martyr bypasses all this questioning of the grave etc.”

U.S. and Canadian authorities continue to investigate the case and assess whether Khan had any additional accomplices or links to other extremist networks.

[email protected]

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Support a public interest startup. We break international stories and this requires elite expertise, time and legal costs.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Business

Trump’s Initial DOGE Executive Order Doesn’t Quite ‘Dismantle Government Bureaucracy’

Published on

 

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By Thomas English

President Donald Trump’s Monday executive order establishing the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) presents a more modest scope for the initiative, focusing primarily on “modernizing federal technology and software.”

The executive order refashions the Obama-era United States Digital Service (USDS) into the United States DOGE Service. Then-President Barack Obama created USDS in 2014 to enhance the reliability and usability of online federal services after the disastrous rollout of HealthCare.gov, an insurance exchange website created through the Affordable Care Act (ACA). Trump’s USDS will now prioritize “modernizing federal technology and software to maximize efficiency and productivity” under the order, which makes no mention of slashing the federal budget, workforce or regulations — DOGE’s originally advertised purpose.

“I am pleased to announce that the Great Elon Musk, working in conjunction with American Patriot Vivek Ramaswamy, will lead the Department of Government Efficiency (‘DOGE’),” Trump said in his official announcement of the initiative in November. “Together, these two wonderful Americans will pave the way for my Administration to dismantle Government Bureaucracy, slash excess government regulations, cut wasteful expenditures, and restructure Federal Agencies.”

The order’s focus on streamlining federal technology and software stands in contrast to some of DOGE’s previously more expansive aims, including Elon Musk’s claim that “we can [cut the federal budget] by at least $2 trillion” at Trump’s Madison Square Garden rally in November. Musk now leads DOGE alone after Vivek Ramaswamy stepped down from the initiative Monday, apparently eying a 2026 gubernatorial run in Ohio.

The order says it serves to “advance the President’s 18-month DOGE agenda,” but omits many of the budget-cutting and workforce-slashing proposals during Trump’s campaign. Rather, the order positions DOGE as a technology modernization entity rather than an organization with direct authority to enact sweeping fiscal reforms. There is no mention, for instance, of trillions in budget cuts or a significant reduction in the federal workforce, though the president did separately enact a hiring freeze throughout the executive branch Monday.

“I can’t help but think that there’s more coming, that maybe more responsibilities will be added to it,” Susan Dudley, a public policy professor at George Washington University, told the Daily Caller News Foundation. Dudley, who was also the top regulatory official in former President George W. Bush’s administration, said the structure of the new USDS could impact the recent lawsuits against the DOGE effort.

“I think it maybe moots the lawsuit that’s been brought for it not being FACA,” Dudley said. “So if this is how it’s organized — that it’s people in the government who bring in these special government employees on a temporary basis, that might mean that the lawsuit doesn’t really have any ground.”

Three organizations — the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), National Security Counselors (NSC) and Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) — separately filed lawsuits against DOGE within minutes of Trump signing the executive order. The suits primarily challenge DOGE’s compliance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), alleging the department operates without the required transparency, balanced representation and public accountability.

The order also emphasizes not “be construed to impair or otherwise affect … the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.”

“And the only mention of OMB [Office of Management and Budget] is some kind of boilerplate at the end — that it doesn’t affect that. But that’s kind of general stuff you often see in executive orders,” Dudley continued, adding she doesn’t “have an inside track” on whether further DOGE-related executive orders will follow.

“It’s certainly, certainly more modest than I think Musk was anticipating,” Dudley said.

Trump’s order also establishes “DOGE Teams” consisting of at least four employees: a team lead, a human resources specialist, an engineer and an attorney. Each team will be assigned an executive agency with which it will implement the president’s “DOGE agenda.”

It remains unclear whether Monday’s executive order comprehensively defines DOGE, or if additional orders will be forthcoming to broaden its mandate.

Continue Reading

International

California’s soaring electricity rates strain consumers, impact climate goals

Published on

From The Center Square

By 

While the greenhouse gas reduction programs that raise electricity rates are part of California’s climate goals, the increased prices actually discourage individuals from switching away from using fossil fuels impacting California’s ambitious climate goals.

California has completed yet another year with some of the highest electricity rates in the country – almost double the national average. The state’s electricity rates have been increasing rapidly, outpacing inflation in recent years by approximately 47% from 2019 to 2023. This is due largely to the high rates charged by the state’s three large investor-owned utilities (IOUs).

According to a report published by the California Legislative Analyst Office, the factors driving rate increases are wildfire-related costs, greenhouse gas reduction mandates, and policies and differences in utility operational structures and services territories. Ratepayers bear the brunt of these costs with those who earn lower incomes and live in hotter areas of the state the most severely affected.

The report points out that while the greenhouse gas reduction programs that raise electricity rates are part of California’s climate goals, the increased prices actually discourage individuals from switching away from using fossil fuels impacting California’s ambitious climate goals.

These programs include the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS), which requires utilities to provide a percentage of retail electricity sales from renewable sources, raising costs for ratepayers. Additionally, SB 350 directs the CPUC to authorize ratepayer-funded energy efficiency programs to meet California’s goal of doubling energy efficiency savings by 2030.

“While many other states operate ratepayer-supported energy efficiency programs, on average, we estimate that Californians contribute a notably greater share of their rates to such programs than is typical across the country,” the report notes.

Electricity rates pay for numerous costs related to the construction, maintenance and operation of electricity systems including the generation, transmission and distribution components. However, these rates also pay for costs unrelated to servicing electricity.

“Most notably, the state and IOUs use revenue generated from electricity rates to support various state-mandated public purpose programs,” the report says. “These programs have goals such as increasing energy efficiency, expediting adoption of renewable energy sources, supporting the transition to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs), and providing lower-income customers with financial assistance.”

The largest public purpose program is the California Alternate Rates for Energy (CARE), which provides discounts for lower-income customers. However, the report notes that while CARE benefits certain customers, it shifts the costs onto other slightly higher-income customers and that the majority of Californians spend a larger portion of their income on electricity compared to other states.

 “According to data from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics, California households in the lowest quintile of the income distribution typically spend about 6 percent of their before-tax incomes on electricity, compared to less than 1 percent for the highest-income quintile of households,” reads the report. “Notably, high electricity rates also can impose burdens on moderate-income earners, since they also pay a larger share of their household incomes toward electricity than their higher-income counterparts but typically are not able to qualify for bill assistance programs.”

Electricity bills also reflect other state and local tax charges including utility taxes that are used to support programs such as fire response and parks in addition to the state-assessed charge on electricity use that is put into the Energy Resources Programs Account (ERPA). This account is used to pay for energy programs and planning activities.

While many of the funds recovered through electricity rates are fixed costs for programs, these costs increased in 2022 following the repeal of a state law that limited fixed charges at $10, requiring the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) to authorize fixed charges that vary by income. These come out to be around $24 per month for non-CARE customers and $6 per month for CARE customers.

Wildfire related costs have also been increasing. Before 2019, wildfire costs included in electricity rates charged by IOUs were negligible, but now it has grown between 7% and 13% of typical non-CARE customers. Reasons for this increase include California’s high wildfire risk and the state’s liability standard holding IOUs responsible for all costs associated with utility-caused wildfires.

“The magnitude of the damages and risks from utility-sparked wildfires have increased substantially in recent years,” reads the report. “Correspondingly, IOUs have spent unprecedented amounts in recent years on wildfire mitigation-related activities to try to reduce the likelihood of future utility-caused wildfires, with the associated costs often passed along to ratepayers. Furthermore, California IOUs and their ratepayers pay for insurance against future wildfires, including contributing to the California Wildfire Fund.”

According to the report, electricity use and rates for Claifornians are only expected to increase and the legislature will have to determine how to tackle the statewide climate goals while reducing the burden on ratepayers.

Continue Reading

Trending

X