The FBI has launched a terrorism investigation after an IED was ignited at a New York Protest.

 

A suspect drops an IED while police react. CBS News/AFP/Getty.

The FBI has launched a terrorism investigation after an IED was ignited at a protest in New York City. CBS News. The incident occurred at Gracie Mansion, which is where Mayor Zohran Mamdani lives. An anti-Islam protest was occurring, along with a counterprotest when two men from Pennsylvania launched an attack. 18 year old Emir Balat ignited and threw a device and then retrieved a 2nd bomb from Ibrahim Kayumi, a 19 year old, and lit that device as well before dropping it. Neither device worked but the FBI says they were serious IED's, loaded with screws and nails, and had M-80 fireworks as the fuse and a large amount of TATP. It is unclear what the motivation of the attackers were but they did shoot "Allahu Akbar" and are being investigated for ties to ISIS. Both men had recently traveled to the Middle East. 

My Comment:

This is a somewhat confusing situation as it's not clear if these men were members of the counter protests and if they were targeting just the right wing original protest, or both groups. The CBS article describes the attackers as left wing, though I don't know if they should. These guys seem like regular old radical Muslims that happened to be aligned with the left on this particular protest. 

Regardless, everyone was lucky that the bombs didn't go off. From the picture above, the 2nd device absolutely could have killed or wounded the suspect (Emir Balat) along with the police officers that were trying to confront him. And the 1st device could have killed and wounded people on both sides of the protests. 

It was luck that both devices didn't blow up. The design appears to have been sound, but something didn't work. It could have been the fuse or the mixture of the explosives but in both cases the devices failed. If they hadn't we probably would have seen, at the very least, double digit casualties, and potential fatalities. 

I would not be surprised if these attackers had links to ISIS or other terrorist groups. They were traveling in the Middle East and could have made contacts there. Indeed, that may have been where they learned how to make their bombs. Generally speaking, you want someone who has experience to teach you how to build a bomb as trying to learn it yourself is a good way to blow yourself up, so I am guessing they had help while they were overseas, assuming they didn't have domestic help here to build them. If they didn't build them, than that is a real problem as a bombmaker is on the loose... 

I don't think this has too much to do with the war in Iran. It's possible that it was a secondary motivation, but this protest was the motivating factor. It was against Islam in general and New York City's Muslim Mayor Zohran Mamdani and had very little to do with Iran. Plus, my guess is that the attackers were Sunni, given the countries they traveled to and the fact that they might have ISIS ties. Iran's Islam is mostly Shia and I doubt there are going to be too many radical Sunni Muslims that would attack in defense of that regime. 

As for the protest and the counter protest, both of them were pretty cringe if I am honest. You can make an argument that Islam in general is incompatible with the west, but protesting against Mamdani himself because of it (instead of his politics) seems to cross the line to actual harassment. I don't like Mamdani either but it's because he's a leftist, not because he's a Muslim. Indeed, he's an example of a Muslim that doesn't seem that devout and should be left alone, not harassed. He can and should be protested for being a left wing nutjob, not a Muslim. 

The counterprotest was just as cringy. They called this an anti-Nazi rally, as if the only people in the world that would have a problem with Islam are Nazis. Plus, they were protesting in favor of the people throwing the bombs as well. In my view neither of these groups were covering themselves in glory here.

Either way, I do think we are seeing an uptick of Islamic violence again. The good news is that there doesn't seem to be a large terror group like ISIS funding and inspiring it. The bad news is that there are a lot of things that are stirring up the crazies. I don't think we are going to see a major ISIS attack or Iranian sleeper agents (if that was going to happen it would have happened last year), but there are lot of lone wolf attackers that might try something... 

  

Kristi Noem is out at DHS, to be replaced by Senator Markwayne Mullin.

 

Kristi Noem testifying before congress. AP. 

Kristi Noem is out at DHS and will be replaced by Oklahoma Senator Markwayne Mullin. AP. Noem will still have a role in the administration, in a newly created post the "Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas", which will focus on security in the Western Hemisphere. However, it cannot be viewed as a promotion and is a fairly stunning fall for one of Trump's major allies. Noem had faced rare bipartisan criticism. Democrats did not like her actions in Minnesota and disagreed with her attempts to call Alex Pretti and Rene Goode as terrorists. However, Republicans were critical of her as well, most notably criticizing a $220 million ad campaign that was supposed to encourage illegal immigrants to leave but was seen as self-promotion for Noem. Noem was caught in a lie about that ad campaign as she had said that Trump had signed off on the campaign while he did no such thing. She has also been criticized for how she spent DHS money and slow pace in approving FEMA funds. 

My Comment:

The departure of Kristi Noem is the first major departure from the Trump administration at the cabinet level. Compared to Trump's 1st term his cabinet has been very stable and everyone else has remained since being confirmed. It's a major improvement over Trump's 1st term where he had a real problem with incompetent or disloyal cabinet members. 

As for Noem, I never really liked her at DHS. Before heading to DHS, she was a governor and she had a major scandal after she confessed to putting down a dog when it became vicious. Though she made the argument that doing so wasn't uncommon in South Dakota, it was terrible optics and showed that she didn't have very good political instincts. Indeed, it's a major reason why Trump didn't pick her for VP. 

Those bad political instincts struck again during her tenure. Her $220 ad campaign heavily featured herself, and it backfired spectacularly. Instead of encouraging illegal immigrants to leave, it seemed a lot more like self-promoting her as a tough woman yet again. 

The Hill. 

This is the first time I have seen this advertisement and I absolutely see the point. The focus is all on Noem. She looks good riding on a horse and there is a ton of focus on who she is and not much on the actual focus of the advertisement, getting illegal aliens to go back home. It absolutely has the tone as if she is running for something, despite already having a high ranking position. It was, in short, pretty inappropriate for a sitting cabinet member. 

The media was talking about other scandals, and I do think she does deserve some criticism for that too. Though I generally approved of the DHS operations in Minnesota and do consider Alex Pretti and Rene Goode to be domestic terrorists, the way Noem handled both backfired. Noem went for flashy, high profile, raids which enraged the left and allowed them to frame the operation of tyranny. And though Pretti and Goode were horrible people that were doing horrible things, Noem called them terrorists before any kind of investigation could have proven that. 

In short, I think she has terrible political instincts and seems to care a lot more about her image than actually being competent. She does have some talent, but it's overshadowed by the fact that she just doesn't seem to understand how her actions will look to the general public and that's fatal for a cabinet member in charge of one of Trump's main platforms. Indeed, she made it look to Democrats that she was cracking down far too hard, while many Republicans have been whining that she wasn't doing anywhere near enough. That's a clue that she lost the plot. 

Markwayne Mullin should be a very good replacement, and one that Democrats may regret getting rid of Noem for. Mullin is respected in the Senate and is very likely to be confirmed. And he has a reputation of a fighter, both metaphorically and literally as he was an MMA fighter. If nothing else, he has to have better political instincts than Noem. 

Finally, I have to say that I do dislike the Noem archetype. Though she is a pretty strong Republican she is the same kind of person like Nancy Mace, Marjorie Taylor Greene or Pam Bondi. All of them seem to fit the "Girl Boss" archetype, where it's more important to look good and look tough than actually be competent and it seems all of them were promoted beyond their actual abilities. There are plenty of strong Republican women who actually are hard workers and are incredibly competent but I don't like these girl bosses no matter what party they are. Noem and her ilk are just the AOC and Ilhan Omar of the right...  

Iran war update: US gets submarine kill on Iranian frigate, F-35 gets first air to air kill.

 

The IRIS Dena, now at the bottom of the Indian Ocean. The Guardian/Reuters. 

The United States has destroyed the Iranian frigate IRIS Dena in the Indian ocean, marking the first time a US Submarine has torpedoed an enemy ship since World War II. The Guardian. The Dena was returning from India after a fleet review and was torpedoed near Sri Lanka. The ship was Iran's newest vessel and was destroyed. Some survivors were rescued by the Sri Lankans. 32 survivors and 28 bodies have been recovered as of this writing.

https://t.co/PiqQpVIrMu pic.twitter.com/Wc1e0B0um7

— Department of War 🇺🇸 (@DeptofWar) March 4, 2026

  

File photo of the F-35 Lightning II, similar to the F-35-Aidr operated by Israel. Times of Israel/Reuters.

Israel has secured the first air-to-air kill of a manned aircraft by an F-35 after shooting down a Yak-130 over Tehran. Times of Israel. The F-35 was the Aidr version used by Israel and is the first time Israel has gotten an air-to-air kill in 40 years. The aircraft shot down, the Yak-130 isn't a pure fighter craft, it's a trainer and strike aircraft, but was more of a threat than other obsolescent designs, like the F-4 Phantom and F-5 Tiger, that Iran had been using. In addition, the UK got their first air-to-air kill of a drone with their own F-35 flying over Jordan. 

My Comment:

This is far from a comprehensive update of everything that is happening with the war in Iran, I obviously did not mention the fact that Iran launched a missile at Turkey, of all places. But I did want to focus on these military firsts given how significant they are.  

First, the sinking of the IRIS Dena. The Dena was one of the most threatening remaining surface combatants Iran had and unlike the rest of the fleet, it was deployed when the conflict started. It appeared to be heading back to Iranian waters. Though the ship was not a powerful surface combatant compared to US ships in the area, it did represent a major threat as it was armed with surface to air and surface to surface missiles, that could potentially be a threat to US planes and ships. It could have even been used as a commerce raider given that it was free in the Indian Ocean. 

Given that, it needed to be destroyed and an attack sub was probably the best option. Airstrikes would have been difficult given the position of the USS Ford and USS Lincoln, and I doubt that the US Navy had a surface ship of their own to go toe to toe with the Dera. Instead a submarine fired two torpedoes at the ship and appears to have destroyed it completely, to the point where the Sri Lankans only saw an oil slick when they came to rescue the survivors. 

Also notable, and somewhat buried in the article is that the ship reported to have their weapons disabled through electronic means. This seems like it goes beyond the normal electronic jamming, as I don't see how it would completely disable the Dena's weapons systems. 

Could this be another use of the famed "discombobluator" that Trump mentioned in the Maduro raid? Trump described it as a weapon that could simply shut off electronics, such as the weapons used by the Dena. From what it sounds like this would be a directed energy weapon that would use high energy microwaves to induce an EMP (electromagnetic pulse) effect on the target. If that is the case, it's a gamechanger as it would give a huge military advantage to the United States for what should be obvious reasons. 

As for the F-35, any dogfight is notable. To be fair, I didn't write a post about the Qatari F-15's that got air-to-air kills on SU-24 fighter jets, but I absolutely did note it. The F-35 finally getting an air-to-air kill is notable given how controversial the type is and because it was against a more modern fighter. 

To be fair, it's not like the Yak-130 is really a top of the line fighter jet. It's a trainer and attack aircraft that can be used as an interceptor in a pinch. It's fast and maneuverable, but it likely had no realistic chance in a long range fight with an F-35, and I am guessing it would struggle in a dogfight as well.  The fact that Iran is using the type at all to contest the skies over Tehran shows that their Air Force has been severely depleted. 

The F-35 has been criticized for not being a good dogfighter and not having the capabilities of the F-22. This should be a minor vindication of the type as it shows that its role as a long range fighter is real. In this combat environment, it would be almost impossible for Iran to get into a dogfight and it makes the use case of the F-35 a lot more defensible. It will still get some well deserved criticism for being overpriced and being vulnerable in dogfights (and for only having one engine), but this use will be a good proof of concept for the fighters use in the future. 

I do have to wonder why Iran even bothered at this point. The chances of a single Yak-130 doing much of anything against the US and Israeli fighters arrayed against them is almost nil. I guess they could have gotten lucky and gotten into missile range of a fighter jet somehow, but even then, at best you shoot down one fighter. It wouldn't change the fact that the United Sates and Israel have total air superiority in this war, and will likely be joined by other nations soon. Though if the leadership of Iran was rational, this war would have never happened in the first place. 

The Surpreme Court appears likely to overturn federal gun control law that bars drug users from owning firearms.

 

Stock photo of a marijuana joint. NBC News/AFP/Getty.

The Supreme Court appears likely to overturn or modify a federal gun control law that bars drug users from owning firearms. NBC News. The case, United States v. Hemani involves Ali Daniel Hemani, who was arrested in Texas by federal officers after being found with marijuana, cocaine and a handgun. Hemani's lawyers argued that the law that bars gun ownership for users of drugs was unconstitutional under the Bruen test, which requires gun laws to have a historical precedent. The Government's argument was that there were historical gun bans for "habitual drunkards", but Hemani's lawyers argued that the standard was a lot higher than simply possessing and using drugs. The court seemed swayed by that argument, with justices noting that simply using drugs did not make someone dangerous and even noted that the bar for habitual drunkards was extremely high, noting the founding fathers own heroic levels of drinking. The case attracted odd bedfellows, with the ACLU, NORML and gun rights groups supporting Hemani while the Trump Administration and gun control groups supporting the law. 

My Comment:

I have written about this law before, but it was in the context of Hunter Biden's conviction of the same crime. Hunter Biden, infamously, lied on his federal 4473 form that everyone has to fill out before buying a gun as part of the background check. There is a box, 11e, that asks if you use drugs and Biden, as a heavy drug user, lied. At the time I thought Hunter Biden might bring the case to the Supreme Court, but Joe Biden pardoned him before the issue became relevant. Thankfully Hemani was able to bring a similar case. 

I do think that the law,  (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3)), should be overturned. Being a drug user should bar you from your constitutional right to own firearms. Actually using a gun while high should be a crime, outside of active self defense situations, but simply owning a firearm and using drugs does not make you necessarily dangerous. 

Making the issue even more dumb is the fact that marijuana counts as one of the drugs. Though I am no fan of weed, it's absurd that you are committing a federal crime buying a gun after using a substance that is legal in 40 of 50 states for medicinal use and 24 out of 50 for personal use. And alcohol, a drug that does affect behavior, is not one of the drugs. 

I do think that there is a precedent for laws that could bar drug users from owning firearms, but the standard is going to be extremely high. Habitual drunkards is a level of degeneracy that was hard to reach even back in the time of the founding fathers. Are there drug addicts that reach that level today? Absolutely! And in those cases you probably could bar them from gun ownership. 

But I really do think that there has to be some kind of ruling from the government that says you are a degenerate drug user, like some kind of commitment to a treatment center or strong evidence of bad behavior related to drug use. Given that most degenerate drug users are going to be barred from gun ownership due to felony convictions or being committed to a mental health center, it's kind of a moot point. 

So how will the court rule? I am guessing that the law will be at least partially overturned. The Justices, even the liberal ones, seemed very skeptical of the law as it was written. I don't expect a full repeal of the law, but I would be surprised if the law wasn't seriously modified. 

I'd take the win in either case. Though marijuana isn't legal in my state, and even if it was, I would never try it so I wouldn't have to lie on my federal 4473 form if I ever buy another gun. I don't really have a desire to try pot regardless, but I do think it's ridiculous that if I wanted to I would have to give up my gun rights to do so. That absolutely should change.

Finally, I have to say that I am disappointed that the Trump administration is defending this law. Though Trump has been far better for gun rights than the Democrats, he's also squishy on the issue and this is a good example of that being the case. To be honest, he's also been squishy on marijuana issue as well, going through the trouble of rescheduling the drug, but still having a very baby boomer opinion on the drug and it's users (yes, I know Trump isn't a baby boomer, but still). Folks accuse me of always defending Trump, but this is another case where I do think he should be criticized.  

Mass shooting in Austin Texas appears to have been an act of terrorism.

 

An image of the shooter, Ndiaga Diagne. Fox News.

A mass shooting in Austin Texas is being investigated as an act of terrorism. Fox News. The shooter, 53 year old Ndiaga Diagne, opened fire from his SUV around 2:00 am at a crowd gathered outside of a bar with a handgun. He then got out of his vehicle and continued firing until he was shot and killed by police. Two people were killed by the gunman and 14 others were wounded. The suspect was a naturalized citizen originally from Senegal. He was wearing a shirt that said "Property of Allah" and an undershirt that had the Iranian flag underneath. Despite the motivation likely being Islamic terrorism, no direct links to any terror group or the Iranian government are suspected at this time. 

My Comment:

Looks like the conflict with Iran has stirred up the crazies. This guy was not part of any organization but decided to pick up a rifle and a handgun anyways. Supposedly he has a criminal history and a history of mental illness. He fits the profile of a "lone wolf" terrorist and those do tend to be stirred up by current events. 

I think there is almost zero chance of this guy being directly connected to Iran. He was from Senegal, not Iran and no connection has been found between him and Iran. And this was not an all organized attack. The attacker just went to a popular night-life location and opened fire, that's not exactly a complicated plan. I would expect that a state sponsored terror attack would be a lot more sophisticated than that and would target something more important than a crowd at bar close. 

Indeed, I think the idea of Iran having a bunch of sleeper cells in America is pretty provably false at this point. Iran did not activate any sleeper cells when the United States bombed Iran's nuclear facilities or during the war with Israel. I am guessing if they had large numbers of sleeper agents they would have activated them last year. Iranian Americans are generally against the Iranian government as well. 

Thankfully, this attack was put down pretty quickly. Indeed, it seems like the attacker made a pretty bad mistake in opening fire with his handgun first as opposed to his rifle. This gave the cops time to kill him quickly after his first attack. It also may be why so few people died, I can't imagine his pistol fire was accurate from the seat of his car and the rounds were a lot less powerful. 

There are some pretty obvious questions as to why this guy was allowed to stay in the United States and get citizenship. He was originally a tourist overstay from 2000 but was allowed to be a permanent resident in 2006 after a marriage to an American citizen, and got his own citizenship in 2013. Of course, none of this would have been happened if he had been deported after overstaying his visa. 

It's rather surreal that this attacker may have been tweeting at a sitting US Congressman, Randy Fine. Fine was in the news for being rather anti-Muslim and Diangne may have tweeted at him after Fine said that if you hear "Allahu Akbar" someone's about to get killed. I don't know if it's confirmed that this was the shooter or not, but still, it's bizarre. 

The Muslim terrorist in Austin had tweeted at me.

He was upset I said that when someone screams Allahu Akhbar there’s a good chance someone is going to get killed.

That’s exactly what this Muslim terrorist was screaming last night as he murdered Americans.

The time for… https://t.co/PbgJBoC4DB

— Congressman Randy Fine (@RepFine) March 1, 2026

So, is there potential for more attacks like this? Like I said, I think sleeper attacks are unlikely, but lone wolf attacks like this are fairly likely from the Islamic community. These kinds of attacks often follow major media events like the conflict with Iran. And I don't think it will just be the Islamic community that will be stirred up. The far left could be a threat as well, given how deranged they have become about President Trump. Such attacks aren't certain, but are possible, so it would be smart to keep your head on a swivel until the war ends...