Our media and our president, working as a team of course, will seek to minimize the influence Radical Islam had on the brothers Tsarnaev. The Boston Globe has already begun this soiree of deception with a story under the headline, Islam Might Have Had Secondary Role In Boston Attacks. Boston’s mayor is assuring everyone, the bombers acted alone, but the FBI has suddenly awakened or been embarrassed by the Obama/Jihad denial syndrome and is now taking its job seriously.
The Globe is carrying on a tradition that began when the president and his media ignored the fact that Army Major Hasan was shouting Allah Akbar while he tried to kill as many soldiers as possible, classifying the event as “Work Place Violence” The tradition continued when the president, his top aides, and his media blamed the Benghazi attack and subsequent murders of a diplomat and three other Americans on an obscure film. When the Secretary of State was questioned regarding the actual facts of the Benghazi assault, America and the world heard Hillary Clinton shrilly scream “What Does It Matter?”
Thus the duplicitous cover-up was given official sanction by one of America’s Elite political family members; America’s top opposition politicians fell for the audacity of the ruse, perhaps to avoid the embarrassment and humiliation of a former First Lady having a neurotic breakdown during testimony. Consequently, Islamic Terror was given another pass by the president; the State Department; and of course the always faithful, loyal, and obedient media.
“What does it matter” the indignant Liberal Progressive loyalist will ask.
“Nothing,” I respond, if we are willing to discount more instances of Islamic Terror like Boston and ask the many victims to forget their pain and acknowledge the sensitivities of a president who has a special relationship with Islamic Terror or denies its existence at the very least.
“Oh, but it is the FBI’s job to interdict terror, not the president’s,” our loyal Progressives will cry.
This is the same FBI, whose leader and policy are designated by our president. The ones who interviewed Tamerlane two years ago and decided he was not a threat despite being warned by the Russians.
When a president insists that all references to Islamic Terror be squelched and purposely appoints the most inappropriate and incompetent people to head the Department of Homeland Security, a name that has become an oxymoron, Americans are left wondering about the true intent and goals of this president.
Hopefully, Americans will realize that being lulled into a false sense of security is hardly a policy of national defense. The media will continue to downplay the Islamic influence and politicians will deny reality to appease our president and his fondness for all things Islamic.
Chuck Schumer, a partisan hack, who makes no effort to disguise his bias or his innate stupidity, responded to the possibility of reconsidering the immigration policy in light of Boston’s Terror with this nonsense:
“In general, we are a safer country when law enforcement knows who is here, has their fingerprints, photos, et cetera, background checks,” Schumer said.
“In addition, both the refugee program and asylum program have been strengthened in the past five years such that we are much more careful about screening people in terms of who should and should not be coming into the country,” Schumer added. “If there are any changes that our homeland security experts tell us need to be made, I’m committed to making them.”
Schumer’s comments came after the committee’s Ranking GOP Member Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) mentioned the Boston bombing earlier in the hearing. Schumer’s chastisement of his colleagues about mentioning the Boston attack appeared to be a response to Grassley.
“We also appreciate the opportunity to talk about immigration, particularly in light of all that’s happening in Massachusetts right now and over the last week,” Grassley said to open the hearing. “We are here trying to understand why these events have occurred. It’s hard to understand that there are people in this world that want to do Americans harm, so this hearing is an opportunity to refocus on the issues at hand and the importance of remaining vigilant and secure in our homeland.”
Schumer is again referring to the same FBI that interviewed the bombers two years ago and was warned by the Russian government of the possibility of problems from the pair.
Is Napolitano, the quintessential Obama stooge, likely to question the administration’s immigration policy, not likely.
America is condemned to more of the dog chasing its tail immigration policy with Liberal hacks and Obama Republicans telling us everything is wonderful and that our present ship of state, a ship of fools in reality, is competent enough to prevent more Boston Bombings. Good Luck America!
A professional horseman for over 50 years, Skook continues to work with horses. Skook has finished an historical novel, Fifty Thousand Years, that traces a mitochondrial line of DNA from 50,000 years ago to the present. The story follows a line of courageous women, from the Ice Ages to the present, as they meet the challenges of survival with grit and creativity. These are not women who whimper of being victims, they meet the challenges of survival as women who use their abilities without excuses or remorse, these women are winners, they are our ancestors.
Fifty Thousand Years is available in paperback and e-book, it is getting great reviews. You can purchase a copy here; Visit me on Facebook.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/Dylantheauthor
And let’s not forget right-wing terrorism. http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/04/19/467384/chart-right-wing-extremism-terror-threat-oklahoma-city/?mobile=nc
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Nice try at moral equivalence but your point is weak at best. If you were betting on which it would be in Boston; a right wing extremist or a Islamic terrorist, which would you choose? If you wanted to be right that is.
http://www.globalincidentmap.com/
The woodwork is opening up and the wood worms are coming out.
1. Tamerlan Tsarnaev may have murdered his ´only American friend´ in an unsolved triple killing two years ago. Brendan Mess had his ´throat slit´ alongside two other men in a Massachusetts apartment in 2011. Oddly their three bodies were covered in pot. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2312814/Tamerlan-Tsarnaev-Friends-suspect-Boston-bomber-murdering-American-friend-2011.html#ixzz2RCEnjZEA
2. Tamerlan Tsarnaev ‘brainwashed’ Katherine Russell and also his younger brother.
Of couse, in Katherine’s case the ‘brainwashing’ included getting her pregnant, beating her and forcing her to convert to Islam and to give up college to be his baby factory. (Sounds remarkably like how every kidnapped Coptic teen is treated in Egypt.) http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2312588/Boston-bombing-EXCLUSIVE-How-Katherine-Russell-Muslim-convert-widow-Tamerlan-Tsarnaev.html
Islam is the glue that holds this act of terror together.
These two brothers (and whoever else helped them) would never have done it had they not been Muslim.
And, if you read any of the hundreds of accounts from those who left Islam in the book Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out by Ibn Warraq you see this pattern over and over again whether the family is in India, Iraq, Philippines, Russia or the USA: one Muslim like Tamerlan Tsarnaev joins the family and the whole group becomes threatened with death from apostasy if they don’t become Islamic activists or disappear.
The book is only about those who were successfully able to disappear.
Islam is becoming an extremist, activist religion one family at a time.
Skook,
As always it’s great to see your analysis of an issue. One definitely has to question anything “investigated” by this administration as lies and coverup are sure to be included. And let’s not forget the Gun runner case and our “above the law” President invoking executive privilege in this regard. As you correctly point out, the usual shills and hucksters along with the co-opted media (propaganda apparatus) are already working to minimize and turn attention from the obvious.
You are correct in that it’s bad enough our lying sack of s… politicians don’t want the truth out so as to save their phoney baloney asses (one can argue this for months, but the bottom line is it is everyone’s fault as to that). This country in it’s neglect of one of it’s most basic rights refuses to take elections seriously. Shame on us! As we have scum politicians on both sides of the aisle who once elected or e-elected after lying through their pie holes, it’s not hard to understand the basics of what is happening. The “strike any mention of Islam or terrorism” language to be P.C. is but one example. Islamists are at war with this country and our leaders and their lackeys in the press refuse to acknowledge it.
Which brings me to my main rant, one folks on this site have heard from me so many times, the co-opted media and it’s complete abrogation of it’s duties as what was once known as the “Watchdogs of Freedom’.
My God, how did we in this country get to the point of being oblivious the the “Stalinist style” indoctrination coming out of the media (and our schools for that matter). Back when, Woodward and Bernstein, in great journalistic fashion brought down Nixon and rightfully so (The fact that there were Nixon haters everywhere notwithstanding, the cover-up was exposed and he paid as warranted). One must ask again, what happened to journalism and reporting in general. As one watches the various networks, how did journalism morph into “I’m going to lie to your face because the dictator in charge is the only one to believe” fashion?
Once, a scandal be it affecting either party was open invitation for a blood letting by the media. Now it’s “coverup for those we don’t like and in this case it is mostly for the liberals (and yes, there are those on the right that practice this, but are in the minority in most cases as compared to the MSM). The basic ideals of this country are being tromped upon, led by the leftist and RINO scum and in turn the Pravda/Tass style of reporting (for those of you libbys who are going to get their panties into a knot over my comments, that translates to propaganda!). The truth is being hidden by the very people who are supposedly trained to get it out! As such, our country in fact will keep going down the tubes because an ill informed, I want it all electorate is being fed lies and worse from this administration (and others before this, this is just the worse example in my lifetime) and accepting it as fact.
Sorry for the length here, but one other thing I’ve said in the past and I aim this at the MSM. Once a dictator or such doesn’t need your lies and so forth anymore, the media will also be targets.
Again, great stuff Skook. Somehow you always manage to get me going. LOL!
@joetote: Despite the dedicated work of Woodward and Bernstein, I can’t believe they would have been so altruistic or bequeathed in editorial professionalism if Nixon had been a Democrat.
They were partisan hacks, who had the story of a lifetime dropped in their laps; fortunately for them, the politics fit their ideological beliefs.
Great post – only one item that I always take exception: the words radical islam. It is more like fundamental islam. The radicals are more likely to be the ones that eschew the violence of islam and preach peace. The fundamentalist islamists get right down to the nitty gritty of “subduing the infidel”.
@Skook:
“Despite the dedicated work of Woodward and Bernstein, I can’t believe they would have been so altruistic or bequeathed in editorial professionalism if Nixon had been a Democrat.”
The sad thing is, I believe you are correct. However, at least back then, scandal involving anyone in politics (Gary Hart for example) use to get the media’s blood lust going because everyone loves a good scandal. now scandal is a selective term as is everything else with the co-opted media.
good case in point. Ayres came out a week or so ago and said Yes, he did in fact host whatever it was and our so called bald faced liar of a President was there, a fact that has been buried by the MSM and Obama apologists. Where is the outcry as to the open blatant lie as told by the sorry excuse for a President? Ooops! Democrat! Can’t have the propaganda boys broadcast the truth, even after the fact.
Liberal1,
“rightwing” McVeigh was a registered Democrat. Not a republican. The fact that he wanted to directly attack gov installation or gov institutions made him no different than William Ayers and the Weather Underground in that regard. Think progress is recurving things here. That report they mentioned was thrown out by the admin itself and “republicans” weren’t the only ones complaining about it. And I got news for you. The party of the grand old south that spawned the KKK was the Democratic party. The party of G. Wallace. The party of slavery.
The chart they(Think Progress) put together is laughable. Yes, only a few AlQueda attacks in 2001. But, they killed 3,000 people, destroyed billions in realestate, jobs, etc…and took a huge nip out of our economy. Not to mention changed our lives and how we live and spawned 2 wars, many more thousands of death, money, etc. They lump that in with some neo-nazi, skinhead nut who does a suicide by cop shootout cause his old lady left him and took the kids and call it rightwing terrorist attack. Classy. You might as well have a chart comparing the number of times people cut themselves with a knife while prepping vegetables vs AlQueda attacks to show that you are FAR more likely to be a victim of the former than the later. See how safe you are? LOL. Ridiculous.
The actual gov report they reference doesn’t refer to any actual attacks, but say we should all be worried about people who like to dress up in fatigues and go shooting or hunting, or do military prep drills. Hell, I did that in the boy scouts!!! We built shelters, tracked animals, we went shooting, we learned field first aide, we learned to make camp, fire, we learned how to tie knots, snare-dress- and cook small game. I guess we were neo-nazi, racist, “rightwing” extremists too although I don’t recall that particular merit badge.
We had youth clubs run my ex-military that did PT, swimming, judo, boxing, weight training, basic drill and firearms training, as well as archery. I guess that too, today, would qualify for “rightwing” extremism….despite the fact that most of the people where I was from in the deep south were blue dog democrats.
Maybe you are too young to realize that? Or maybe, if you are old enough, you just “forgot”.
And of course…instead of respecting our veterans coming home from Afghanistan after we sent them there….we should view them as potential rightwing extremist and danger to our security above and beyond the people they were fighting who “continue” to plot and carry out attacks against our country? Really? There’s a reason that report was yanked. Despite it being well true that there are “always” examples one can find of anything…bad/good, etc…it was how it was compiled together and the inferences that it made, drawing conclusions about motivations based on race, religion and otherwise that made the report highly inaccurate and even offensive.
We still see the same garbage pop up every now and again from this admin, in different ways. Most recently, an Army Reserve Training presentation which lists US Christians, Jews and Catholics as “extremist” groups using a report from the southern poverty law center. AlQueda was fourth I think. It was used in a training session…caused some stir (since Army personnel are forbidden to be a part of any org listed on the “extremist” list) and was pulled. I can’t imagine “anyone” not knowing or understanding why this might be a problem. But, apparently, there are plenty who think this way.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2304739/Army-Reserve-training-material-lists-Catholics-evangelical-Christians-Jews-religious-extremism-category-KKK-Hamas-Al-Qaeda.html
@Dc: That is a tight group in the center of the V ring. Well done Sir, well done indeed.
@Dc: I am in the middle of a historical novel story of an abolitionist who travels from Baltimore to Kansas and Missouri during the bloody days before the Civil War started.
He is a Republican and the Democrat pro-slavery extremists are doing the killing, raping, and raiding. I am not pulling in punches and plan to shine the light on these ignored facts.
It’s for sure our public education system neglected to teach this colorful bit of history and our cultural icons in Hollywood wouldn’t touch it with a thirty foot pole. I doubt if you can find 1 Democrat in a thousand who is aware of this phase of their history and most will not believe the insanity that spawned their great party.
Hell Skook….the way they teach these days…I’m pleasantly surprised, shocked even, when I see a young person who actually knows the words to our National Anthem or the pledge of allegiance. Got chills/goosebumps when the Boston stadium took over the National Anthem and actually sang it properly. Kudos for them.
Good luck with the book!
Alleged terror plot thwarted by arrests in Ontario, Quebec
Canada thwarts ‘major terrorist attack’ with arrests: CBC
@Wordsmith: A major disaster was averted. Let’s hope our president’s complacency is over and our federal agencies are allowed to thwart terror before it happens.
Three cheers for Canada!
Terror cannot be dismissed as a non-entity, because our president wants to ignore it and concentrate on vacations and golf. The indications are pointing to an impending disaster.
@Wordsmith:
These might be the TEA partiers the Left has been pining for, Word.
Nobody has said who they are yet.
It could also be a group of rogue Nuns. I mean…as long as we are guessing 🙂
Well, drat!
It was al Qaeda…..Islam and Muslims again!
Here’s a laugh:
OK, who is surprised?
Only ignorant Westerners who fail to understand that all Islamic leaders are willing to unite (temporarily) to destroy the Great Satan (the USA and West) and the Little Satan (Israel).
Their plot always includes the willingness to abrogate their temporary peace treaty with another sect of Islam LATER.
We even saw this back in 2003 when al Qaeda in Iraq was starting to clean up the Iraqi apostates within Islam instead of fighting the US and its allies first.
See the book that is a collection called: The Al Qaeda Letters
Skook, while I can’t disagree much with anything that you wrote that admin and LEO officials are reticent to attach “Islam” to the “terrorism” label, I’ll also add an expanded view of that from a less emotional viewpoint.
Terrorism… regardless of whether it’s motivated via religion (i.e. Islam)… or financial/sociopolitical (OWS, ELF, Weather Underground, etal) … are equally reprehensible. I can’t say that ELF’s terrorism is more acceptable, or even the OWS wanton disregard for property and life, than Islamic based terrorism. Islamists do like body counts (not that it does their world creds much good), but others have had their body counts as well. To me, terrorism and it’s intent is just that… universally unacceptable.
What can be said is that the Obama DOJ is not classifying this as anything *but* terrorism. So they aren’t dodging the issue legally, even if you think they are dodging it via official mouthpiece statements. And by this, I assume you are equating the DOJ and admin as the equivalent as the idiots who comprise an under researched and fawning media.
This non-dodge is evident with the formal charges against Bomber Two. All of which cite 18 USC Chapter 113B – TERRORISM.
So the real question is, even tho we know the most active terrorists around for the past couple of decades are Islamists, is it necessary to legally site the source/reason of the terrorist activities (i.e. the religion Islam) simply for placating emotions?
Honestly, Skook, I doubt there’s a US citizen anywhere that doesn’t recognize Islamists as being the prime nefarious source of no good. Personally, I don’t need the media to hammer that home. In fact, doing so just plants mistrust in minds for any and all of that same ilk, complicating an already emotional perception. Needless to say, it’s obvious to even the most brain dead in our society that this isn’t an action by those protesting the world banking/financial system, or environmental regulations. Probably about the only thing that surprised many is that they weren’t from the Middle East.
On the other hand, it’s legally prudent not to cite the “motive” for the commission of a terrorist act until, and if necessary, a trial. In fact, I don’t care *why* they committed such an act (as if we don’t already know, fer heavens sake). To insist that we define a particular act as Islamist – or environmental or political – in nature is simply an absurd admission that if we know *why* they did so, we can prevent it from happening again.
Well… no, we can’t. It’s a bridge that cannot be crossed between cultures of extreme fundamentalists and normal folk of moderate temperament. Extremists and loons exist, and there’s nothing we can do about it. Hang, we’ve known for decades why ELF, Weather Underground, OWS and Islamists do these acts. Has it made one iota of difference?
I think my point is that having the media, or WH and DOJ, broadcast that it’s specifically Islamic terrorism is pointless. We all know that. But law focuses not on the motivation why (unless it makes the act justifiable which, in these cases, doesn’t), but the specifics of the legal charges. And the charges by the DOJ are federal terrorism charges. So the DOJ does view this as a terrorist act, even if they aren’t on every blog and talk show, calling it that.
This brings me to some who seem to be upset that some GOP wanted to classify Bomber Two as an “enemy combatant”. Unfortunately, the press has been busy ignoring recent judicial history, and misinforming the masses. You can classify a US citizen, who has perpetrated a terrorist act on US soil, as an “enemy combatant”. It does not follow that the classification automatically means you are tried via military commission.
Padilla is a good example of this… held as an enemy combatant. 4th Circuit held that even tho he was a US citizen, and detained on US soil, he could be held as long as he met certain defined criteria. That would be specific links and associations to int’l terrorists. The SCOTUS opinion just kicked it back to the 4th on a technicality… that their appeal was filed in NY instead of SC where Padilla was detained. So the 4th Circuit finding still stands as law, and a US citizen can be categorized as an “enemy combatant”. However they cannot be tried in military courts. Doesn’t need to be.
What the enemy combatant status would provide is more time latitude to explore how deep these tentacles go. And apparently, if the (yeah, I know.. .it’s funny) UK’s Mirror’s report is correct, these two could be part of a 12 person cell. If that’s the case, there’s a few more federal charges that can be piled on. However without the enemy combatant status, allowing more time to investigate the links, LEOs are limited on getting intel before a defense atty puts the kabosh on questioning. And it’s this that Graham and a few others are trying to accomplish by recommending that status – extra time needed to establish how connected they are.
Also, kudos are due to US agencies, who’s cooperation with the Canadians was also instrumental in thwarting their own terror threat. Apparently they had something more concrete to work with than they did when the Russians alerted the US about Bomber One in 2011… who hadn’t yet traveled to Russia for his six month, alleged terrorist training session.
Knowing about websites, comments and personal views are one thing. But finding enough evidence, legally concrete enough to take action, isn’t as simple because our laws protect us from agencies acting on gut instinct and 1st Amendment views . Obviously if everyone could end up on an actionable suspicion list by their professed blogosphere and social media views alone, half of the nation would be on that list.
Obama: Obviously, tonight there are still many unanswered questions. Among them, why did young men who grew up and studied here, as part of our communities and our country, resort to such violence?
The families of those killed so senselessly deserve answers. The wounded, some of whom now have to learn how to stand and walk and live again, deserve answers.
Obama: “Whatever hateful agenda drove these men to such heinous acts will not — cannot — prevail.”
Thus it was Obama who said the capture of the surviving Boston Marathon bombing suspect capped an “important chapter of this tragedy” while spurring a search into the motives and potential terrorist links behind the blasts.
Obama SEEMS to want to know WHY this happened.
Odd that some do not.
Are people afraid that knowing and acknowledging Islam’s part in terrorism will cause Muslims who already hate ”the great Satan and the little Satan” (the USA and Israel) to hate them MORE?
The whole idea of knowing one’s enemy plays into this.
Not “odd” at all, Nan G. Intel and connections, yes. Whys? Perhaps Obama is behind the times as to the “whys”. (makes good psuedo-compassionate talking points anyway) Most of us aren’t. We’ve “known one’s enemy” for quite some time. There is no placating that enemy. Nor should we try. Their price is that the evil West, and all things Western, are ostracized from their claimed, if not ruled, Caliphate territories. Of course, even if we did that, it will still continue.
@Nan G: #18,
Caught the news and watched a replay of Obama reading this I-need-more-camera-time-looking-earnest moment, and wondered who the hell he was addressing.
Let’s see, it’s 2013 and it’s April, late April, billions of words have scrutinized causes of the September 11, 2001 attack on America, and yes, the MSM has done its best to remain ignorant and to treat its readership as they might treat mushrooms, but good grief, . . . . even hermits living deep in the Alaskan outback subsisting on their own capabilities of hunting and foraging, can deliver a coherent answer to a question which appears to be baffling this Administration.
Of course, if he is just pretending not to know, then, well, who voted for him again?
Oh, wait a minute, he’s appealing to the bleeding heart liberal politically correct crowd . . . . perhaps, . . . . nah! Not possible.
Mata, its a big secret, I speak of the game of words played by the demagogue in the white House. Years of playing hide the sausage with our military. We are tired of “Man Caused Disasters”; “Overseas Contingencies”; “Workplace Violence”; and restrictions on the phrases of “terror”; “Jihadist”; “Islamic Terror”; and “Islamist”. Some of us worry that our demagogue in chief may have encouraged our Islamic Fundamentalists by refusing to admit that they exist.
Oh, excuse me Mata, I just prepared and ate one of the best meals ever. Steak grilled outside, but that was easy. It was the leeks in butter with Portabella mushrooms and Nopale cactus and washed down with a couple Margaritas, how good can life be after a meal like that, a meal that few kings could had the opportunity of enjoying.
Now, back to business; just as we have been appalled by the behavior of this president, surely our Fundamentalist Islamic Friends have been encouraged by the reluctance to call a terrorist a terrorist. Surely, there is more of a willingness to commit radical Jihad and mayhem in a country whose leadership commiserates with the desperate plight of terrorists. This is why we are mad; yet, we are condemned to four more years of the same. Since, it is patently obvious that this president refuses to learn from his mistakes, choosing instead to double his bets on failure.
Mata, while we have been so careful not to offend those who hate us, have we accomplished anything?
Has one terrorist been turned away from his bloody dreams by our pretensions of brotherly love toward the radical fundamentalist?
Are they not emboldened by our superficial claims of having no animosity towards those who want so desperately to kill us?
Do we win the hearts and minds of those who dwell in thoughts of murder and mayhem by our overt efforts to make them like us rather than fear us? Many like these brothers of death find only contempt for our efforts not to offend their delicate sensibilities and desire to appease their evil.
We must admit, the vast majority of the Islamic World either agrees with the radicals or they live in stark fear of reprisal for speaking out in an effort to quell this murderous rage.
Our leaders in Washington want to deny Islamic Terror’s existence but the Islamic people are complicit in the terror in their refusal to condemn the actions of a relative few.
All ready, congressman Ellison is trying to diminish the role of Jihad in the Boston Bombing, by saying that the bombing was a result of political rather than religious reasons. No one, believes him; yet , because of political correctness, we are reluctant to challenge his lie and make him appear to be a lying fool of evil. We can continue to live in an unreal world of political correctness, while we fool no one but a few of our most simple-minded, but the real damage comes from the minds of the most impressionable fanatics who see opportunity in our cloaks of guilt and denial.
We who have guilt because our nation has become so powerful that we feel we must equalize the odds by giving our enemies electronic secrets, fuel oil, F-16s, battle tanks, and cold cash for weaponry and for a form of cronyism among the elites. Again we make a sanctimonious show about legal weapons in the hands of honest citizens and arm our enemies who want to kill us.
We are currently suppling al Qaeda with weapons to depose a dictator who allowed a secular society to co-exist with Israel. Once Assad leaves or is butchered, we will have an enemy in Syria who wants to destroy Israel and the United States. By our actions, we create much bigger problems.
We are encouraging the homicidal maniacs, whether we give them weapons or try to love them into submission. Anyone can make a mistake, but only an imbecile insists on continuing the mistake.
We will pay for our weakness and silliness with American blood, only a few of us are willing to deny what our political correctness and weakness is about to yield, the question is how much blood will flow through our streets before we treat Islamic Terror as a clear and present danger.
Skook, again, I don’t disagree with anything you said. You’re lecturing to the choir here. I’ve always said on this blog that Obama’s policy of interference with our Muslim quasi-allies is far more dangerous than living with the despot we work with on intel and anti-terrorism measures. I’ve also always held the belief that there is nothing we can do to placate them. Even pulling everything Western out of their Caliphate… from embassies to Mickey D’s… they’d still wage jihad.
And if it’s “odd” that someone doesn’t know how they got radicalized, especially those on college campuses, then they are just clueless to begin with. I suspect that Obama knows very well this was a jihad act, and that they gained their penchant for jihad both from campus and Internet exposure. It’s been almost five years since I wrote the post about the Muslim Brotherhood launching their Facebook, college and social media recruitment campaign. It’s no surprise they head for youth at an impressionable age – where their passions for perceived injustice runs high, and their experience and common sense is low.
What it comes down to is that most with a lick of sense know that 1: this was a terrorist attack by somewhat dumb jihadis, 2: that they were recruited and nurtured via the campus and the Internet, and 3: the elder brother was ripe for such indoctrination because of his country of origin.
Perhaps I can clarify this with two points.
First, the American citizens aren’t as politically correct and dumb as the elected officials in the beltway. Every media, including the entertainment types, have been reporting these two bombers were Muslim. They are even entertaining the idea that Bomber One’s wife as “brainwashed” into Islam. Entertainment media, traditionally, leans very liberal. So I think if the beltway is foolish enough to believe that the American citizens don’t recognize jihadis when they see them in Boston… and already know the “whys” of it happening… they are even dumber than I think.
I prefer my news kept separate from commentary. I don’t need the media to preach to me the ills of terrorism, no matter who the source. If I read of a bombing, and they report they are Muslim, I think I know the “hows and whys”. If they report a bombing and say they are environmental activists, or that the OWS or world bank socialists are destroying streets in protests, again I already know the “hows and whys”.
Secondly, from a legal standpoint.. which this admin represents with the DOJ agency… it’s prudent to simply state the facts without further editorial content and emotional judgement. i.e. it’s fine for me, the lay person, to leap to the obvious conclusion that these two were Muslim Islamists, and that they were influenced by their campus surroundings, their background, and their choices of Internet surfing. But as representatives of our law, that observation is inappropriate. “They bombed, they were Muslim, we’re investigating, and we’ll be pressing charges” should be the extent of it. Any appearance of agency/governmental bias, even if genuinely felt (and I suspect it is), is harmful to a successful prosecution. It’s their job and responsibility to keep their emotions out of it when enforcing the law.
As for politicians like Ellison, well I’m sure he considers it his responsibility to keep a check on Islamophobia… so that such emotional anger doesn’t spread to everyone who is Muslim. Unfortunately that already is deeply embedded in far too many, so that’s an uphill task.
Skook, let me ask you this. You said:
Okay… so how about we remove what’s bugging you. That the media throws all editorial restraint to the winds, and throws in the emotional opinion content while reporting the terrorist attack. They lecture the nation about the dangers of Islamic terrorism (like we don’t already know?), spout hatred for Islamists, and rant/rail/lecture about whatever other ills in foreign policy they think cause (or will cure) the problem. Every politician and everyone in the administration does the same.
What does that do? What will that accomplish? Would that make everyone happy that it’s been publicly acknowledged that Islamic terrorists are American enemies, and have been thoroughly trashed by the media and politicians with emotional expressions of hatred?
I think that most citizens are smart enough to recognize enemies and war, no matter what name they want to use to whitewash it. Since the new name will still carry the same impressions and meaning, it’s only a matter of time before that phrase also becomes not so politically correct.
Mata, I hear you. However, I think you are a bit too late. The “news” changed long ago from being fact base reporting of what happened to analysis/opinion and your own personal view of the truth and facts that go with it.
Obama is not behind the times on this. He’s attempting to redefine and control the context of events as they happen. On some levels he’s been successful at that. But, on other levels, he’s failed miserably (ie., the gun control effort). Benghazi was no different. They attempted to redefine it. When that failed they tried to misdirect it. When that failed…they basically have tried to put enough water/time (stalling) between the event and discovery of information about it that other events would take priority and it would just sort of slide down the wall of history where it initially stuck until nobody cares. Then, even before the incident is fully understood or completely documented, you declare the event as unimportant or significant. It’s over and done with. And anyone who would bring it up after that…just beating a dead horse. And carry on like it didn’t happen the way people say.
Hell, they even do it with historical figures and events. So, am I surprised when people come out of the woodwork trying to define and or redefine motives and etc…in this? Hell no. Even when the person/perp says themselves…I did this for my religion. MSNBC has “experts” on to carry on about why his religion had nothing to do with this. And of course the religion is Islam. The progressive meme is this: by admitting to ourselves what these perps themselves declare….that their understanding of Islam religion was the motivation for their murder, we are condemning the entire muslim world for this…and that’s not “right”. And of course their dilemma is, how can we condemn what “these” perps did…without bringing the religion into it. You make it an isolated “crime”. That’s how you do it. A singular event, who’s motivation is unimportant to the crime itself.
The problem with this approach is…it’s not the truth and it clouds the real problems that everyone faces. Not just us. But, the Muslim communities as well.
Removing the context of the event is often a popular way to approach such things. Moral equivalency. etc. None of that changes the “truth” about what happened. It just redirects and hides it (or as progressives say…comes up with a “different” truth).
Yup, Dc… the media has long since left “journalism” in the dust, and are now passing off commentary as insightful news. No disagreement there. But I’m sure not going to encourage more of it.
Obama, as well as all the pols and media, can attempt to “redefine” until the cows come home. What with all the information out there via the Interwebz, it’s not fooling a nation. We know a spade when we see it, and when young Muslim men pull off an event like this, it’s not fooling even the most naive of sympathizers as to the “why” and “how” of their act.
But what I will say is that a leader of the free world has to be careful about what terms he uses when he discusses cases in progress… and that includes discussing motives, alliances and intent. When you attach the word “terrorism” to an act, it becomes a federal crime under our laws, as I pointed out in my comment above. Bomber Two is being charged under our laws governing terrorism… not just a simple crime.
CNN had an editorial today, of which the last two paragraphs point out what I’m trying to say about politicians and POTUS comments on these events.
Whether it satiates anyone that Obama stood up there and used words they wanted to hear… i.e. was it “terrorism”, or more important, should he have specifically labeled it “Islamic terrorism”… it is being dealt with as terrorism via our laws. The rest is extraneous. I have no doubts that Obama and the DOJ recognize this was terrorism by Islamists vs terrorism by other groups who also like to use violence for effect. And for all the “gee, how did this happen” crap, I’m also willing to be that the same POTUS and admin are very aware of the recruitment efforts in jails, on the Internet and in colleges. However with an ongoing federal investigation, are these suppositions wise fodder to offer up in official statements?
Because of the nature of our legal system, I say no. It would be inappropriate for elected officials to insert emotions and speculation (however obvious) in their statements. The media? Well, they just go their merry way and continually make fools of themselves. The interesting thing is that the only ones they are fooling are themselves.
But this is an interesting case as there may be follow up proceedings in State and County jurisdictions as well. Nothing precludes they stay out of the prosecution fray. The reasoning the feds gave for seizing on it was because of it’s effect on interstate and int’l commerce, being as the Boston Marathon is a big money maker, and draws people from all over the world. I linked the criminal complaint in my comment above, and you’ll see what I mean when you read it.
Mata, I think I was referring more to leaving out the context and role that religion has played in a “crime”…when it “is” a motivating factor for the crime. It has implications not just for the crime itself (ie., being a “terrorist act”), but for the Muslim community as well.
My point is that the POTUS or political mouthpieces, should not be citing, nor casting judgement, on motives and intent for a legal reason, Dc. There is an ongoing investigation. For the leader of the free world to remark, prior to a trial and investigative results, that a terrorist did something for a reason that has no evidence presented in our courts of is inappropriate.
@MataHarley: #26,
As I recall, even before it was being termed “Arab Spring,” you consistently and quite appropriately expressed opposition to the support which the MSM and others were voicing for the demonstrations in the ME, starting in 2010 with Tunisia quickly followed with Algeria, but culminating with the devastation of Egypt and Syria. Many were confused as to what it all meant, disoriented by rooting for “democracy” while unclear as to what outcome would surface and by and with whom, . . . . but you remained steadfast. Your understanding of Islam and of the MB no doubt informed your assertions. Most others were just bewildered.
Today the results are clear. The causes are clear. Unfortunately, there remains a pathology of self-condemnation, led by the CIC who, five years following his apology tour, seems to lead an Administration determined to sink everyone into moral equivalency’s quagmire as related to Islam.
You state, “I’m also willing to be that the same POTUS and admin are very aware of the recruitment efforts in jails, on the Internet and in colleges, ……. It would be inappropriate for elected officials to insert emotions and speculation (however obvious) in their statements.” While I agree that a President should remain above the fray, I feel that the agenda of this President and those being him is quite intent on otherwise. Other than use the shattered families’ grief for political purposes, I don’t sense any determined objective to instil fear in the enemy or the enemy’s supporters, or the enemy’s apologists.
I agree with you that it would be, “inappropriate for elected officials to insert emotions and speculation (however obvious) in their statements,” but what we have for 4 years and what we are still being administered, is a suspicious concoction hiding a confused will, or hiding something else altogether. Either way the result is a mess with nothing but catastrophe across the ME and no intelligent policy in sight. I have yet to listen to a single address by this President, unblemished by deception. His actions related to the ME are more than suspect when we consider events such as the Benghazi fiasco, or the current shameful Kerry false moral equivalency train travelling in Turkey. And let’s not bother to acknowledge that Egypt now has voted in a socialist constitution, submerged in Sharia Law. Close the doors on Egypt.
We have found ourselves on safe politically correct soil when talking about Islamic Terrorists, and yet, we have difficulty acknowledging that fundamental Islam preaches hate. I lived a decade in a muslim country, and I’m hardly a conspiracy theorist, but damn, if anyone reads the Koran or Quran, the roots of vengeful terror are not abstruse. While there are endless ‘interpretations,’ as there are of so many other religious sacred books, some can and do interpret the most extreme versions which meet their personal desires. Much is not open to interpretation and it is not positively inclined toward non-believers, and we are fortunate that most do not act on those more severe instructions. But, you know all this and your concerns on the Muslim Brotherhood a few years ago were well founded. Obviously it is just my opinion that the over four years of misleading America will continue for another three, and even the intelligence community is being negatively impacted by this leadership. This non-challance bordering on denial is affecting relationships such as our “friendship” with Saudi Arabia, for example, which has done more for the promotion of Islamist fundamentalism internationally than any other country.
@MataHarley: #29,
Thanks for the response. I don’t mind disagreement, really, since I don’t learn anything if everyone I debate with agrees with me — as long as the discourse is informed, or at the very least somewhat civil, in other words I’m just human with an ego being human. Debate is also only useful if there is clarity in communication. I assume that this is what we’re seeking here.
I think this may be at the crux of the difference of opinion, or my own lack of ability to express what I intended. I don’t care if leadership doesn’t verbalize emotional anger. I do care if it is hypocritical, and I care about its actions, and I care if it misleads from the podium year after year – once, twice, ten times even, . . . . . but four years? No need for emotions, just don’t bullshit. I find it frustrating that, IMHO, this President feeds us too much of this latter, while either doing something diametrically opposite purposefully, or from a lack of capacity.
Of course diplomacy requires back room dealing, and side-dealing, and double-dealing, – what we’re entertained with here isn’t intelligent “negotiating” or anything remotely resembling working on some quid pro quo effort which will on the long term deliver a desired outcome. We have four years of proof as evidenced by very consistent foreign policy failures. We don’t need visceral responses from the POTUS, but the nature of his leadership affects outcomes – legal, political, economic, military or otherwise – and so far, . . . . By now there isn’t much I’d believe from him even if it included tears. Misleading the Nation about anything is harmful, and on Islamic terrorism and extremism in particular, is dangerous.
@Skook:
Who are these people who aren’t familiar with “Islamic Terror”? They must not have had cable TV for the past dozen years. What you call political correctness in these situations is simply the acknowledgement that trying to make some one-to-one correlation between this particular religion and “terror” or “evil” is hopelessly narrow-minded. Assigning some stable value to this or any religion in general is a fools errand. Religion is not a stable elemental thing. Even the most religious will vigorously tell you that 99% of them are all made up. Religion isn’t inherent. Religion is almost always situational: where you were born, who your parents were, etc. It’s one random factor your’re born into among many, which include sex, race, nation, social and economic status, political system, etc. So why is religion the defining constant of terrorism all of a sudden, the only one worth examining? Why are all the other reasons that actually mean something so taboo to discuss? Unless one thinks inciting a mob to go burn down a suburban American mosque is somehow going to protect us from terrorism, I don’t see the point in seeing Islam as the cause while ignoring all the really obvious ones. I’m not saying these extremists aren’t dangerous enemies; far from it. I’m saying that focusing on their religion while ignoring the political, social, economic and historical reasons that spawned them is like ascribing a baseball team’s success to their team mascot. Who cares what they call it, it’s a cult of death. I’m sure Islam adds a certain veneer of pious respectability in their minds, but that’s not the driving reason people join Al Queda. And whatever it is they call it it’s not the same thing as the religion practiced by your fellow citizens at the local mosque.
is that how he work it?
I was trying to figure why so much money to EGYPT, now a billion to the UN
he cannot explain JIHAD the word to young AMERICANS,
I think he is paying for their blood spilled,
not the AMERICANS blood spilled,
he is one of the MUSLIM, he explained it when he try to change the answer
on JIHAD, he define the religion of anything but love and peace to the young students,
wow some of them will join after hearing that, from a leader of the USA,
WHAT MORE DO YOU NEED TO KNOW,
are you going to take that one too?
kiss his ring
@Tom: This tedious discussion was implemented with the best intentions.
There is a growing discontent in America and refusing to classify Major Hassan as a Jihadist maniac was a fulcrum. The president with his apathy towards our best ally in the ME (Israel) and his foreign policies that seemed to only establish an Islamic Caliphate in North Africa, including Egypt, who was in a state of harmony with Israel, as was Syria. Now, al Qaeda and the MB are firmly embedded in the politics of these countries.
Americans are asking, for what purpose or why do we do away with dictators and tyrants to install religious fundamentalists of the type who believe in murder and mayhem and preach the same. Did plans go to Hell, or is there an ulterior method to these plans that always seem to benefit the concept of Islamic statehood.
The president increases the suspicion cast his way by not having an honest and open discourse with America on the situation with Islamic Terror. The word gets out when those words are struck from training manuals and our military is forbidden to mention the phrases, but we cannot wish this plague on humanity away. It must be confronted and destroyed on all levels, whether it is nomadic black Christians suffering genocide in Africa or on American Universities.
No one has mentioned burning mosques, but if Islamic leaders will cooperate and expose the rotten elements, which apparently they tried to finger the elder brother as did the Russians, but our awesome FBI was caught sleeping with their trousers around their ankles on this one.
The quote from my post above sums up my personal attitude:
Acting as though the problem no longer exists is asking for a sucker punch, and Boston got it, right between the eyes. Deleting the phrases from our federal training manuals is pretending the problem no longer exists. Classifying the madman Major Hassan as a perpetrator of Work Place Violence when he is shouting Allah Akbar while killing American soldiers is living in a state of denial, and it is a dangerous state.
@Skookum:
I won’t deny you raise some valid points, and that the threat is real. The framing of the threat, of course, is more problematic. There are many factors, not secrets by any stretch, that can never be raised in certain quarters. Rather than ask tough questions about our enemies and ourselves, the patriotic pose, I’m told, is a one of jingoistic arrogance and surface understanding, anything deeper of course being a sign of weakness, an apparent defect in the national character.
@Tom: I am a fairly simple man, with six years of formal education. Please reword or explain the second half of your post. I lost the meaning, somewhere in the prose and a response would be futile.
SKOOKUM
THERE are not to many PRESIDENTS who left an attack on the PEOPLE OF THE USA unanswered,
HE did it for more than one,
HE is not the PRESIDENT of THE USA,
HE provide jobs for THE MUSLIM WORLD with the money belonging to the AMERICANS,HE is following their way of deserving and expecting a TRIBUTE, like the ANCIANTS leaders would, hE give it to them,
he is responsible for killing the job market in THE USA,
he is the source of all the FRUSTRATIONS of THE PEOPLE,
we see THE PEOPLE are angry, and depress, HE HAS TURN LOOSE the criminals, and ILLEGALS
so THE PEOPLE are being attack from thoses, he is deliberatly blind on the BLACKS YOUNG KILLING THEIR BROTHERS,
HE is willfuly accepting the MUSLIMS in AMERICA leaving them to preach WHAT HE SAID to be the most peaceful religion he love that religion, he own it
HE is the PRESIDENT of the MUSLIM WORLD,
and how many young and old BLACKS AMERICANS have joined the MUSLIM FAITH since they where accepting and their voices
have reach the WHITE HOUSE? how many WHITE YOUNG AND CONFUSED AMERICANS HAVE JOINED BECAUSE OF OBAMA
setting example that their religion is the greatest?
how many?
they can kill any AMERICANS, he will not accuse them to be the one to incite the young PEOPLE in this USA, HE would not take away the promoters of that MUSLIM FAITH from THE SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITY,
any step to counter the advance of MUSLIM HE allowed it to florish,
any killing of AMERICANS he never answered like other PRESIDENT WOULD,
there is a saying that go like this; YOU ARE WITH US OR YOU ARE AGAINST US,
are the TOP PEOPLE in the PENTAGON with us?
are the FBI with us? are any one with the power to do what they must do, have enough guts
to do it? THE ONLY ONE WHO DECIDED FOR THEMSELVE
gave their lives to do the right thing they are THE SEALS OF BENGHASI WHO DIED FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING THEY WHERE ORDER NOT TO DO>
THE PEOPLE WANT TO SEE ACTIONS to cast out the TERRORISTS from this USA, NOT WORDS,
ALL THE PREVIOUS PRESIDENTS MUST BE TURNING IN THEIR GRAVES< AND THE TWO PRESIDENT BUSH MUST HAVE NIGHTMARE TO BE WITNESSING WHAT IS GOING ON,
LAURE BUSH SAID BRIEFLY:
THE WHITE HOUSE IS THE PEOPLE HOUSE,
she was giving a clue to AMERICANS
@MataHarley:
Mata, there is a way for the President, FBI and others to talk about this in terms of a larger context and how threats here are evolving and what needs to be done without divulging national secrets or on-going investigation details. They do this all the time. ie., that’s what they are supposed to do. They are trying to treat this like an isolated incident/crime (ie., like its not part of a repeating pattern which should raise awareness and alarm).
I would also add, that there is a difference between withholding information/details about an on-going investigation/case for the purpose of protecting the case for court….and doing so to keep information FROM the investigation. I think we are going to find out that dept of HS and the FBI screwed the pooch on this one.
Dc, George Dubya specifically called out “Islamic” terrorism throughout his entire two terms, while simultaneously adding that it was a war against a small percentage of Muslims and not all. Did it make a bit of difference? Remember, the subject here seems to be that if Obama doesn’t specifically tie Islamist intent to Boston, we’re all being lied to and considered naive, blind and too stupid to form our own opinions from the obvious. I don’t agree.
Fact is, both the left and right media are going to spin this omission of the word, “Islam”, to their political advantage. The left are going to try an exploit the teen’s impressionable vunerabilities, as well as try to keep the discussion away from the Pam Geller’esque “it’s all Muslims”. The right is going to do everything they can to tie this to Obama… including being annoyed that he doesn’t call it “Islamic” terror…. as if that makes one bit of difference.
But do you honestly think that there is anyone – of any political leanings – who *isn’t” aware that terrorism by Islamists is a repeating pattern? It’s only been going on since the embassy bombings in the late 80s, followed by the USS Cole, the WTC in 93, Sept 11th WTC/Pentagon/Flight 83 and sundry events since then. I doubt there is an American breathing that doesn’t recognize that some Muslims are bent on jihad, and will strike any chance they get. I equally doubt there is anyone who believes this was *not* motivated by radicalization. Granted there may be some people that have been living under a rock, or are just too young to remember history (i.e the friends of these two bombers were 7-14 years old on Sept 11th, 2001). But this isn’t true for the majority of American adults.
INRE HSA and FBI, can I assume you are talking about the Russian contact with the FBI, and a perceived dereliction of duty? Eli Lake has an article about that today, putting a more informed perspective on that. Russians make accusations against Chechnyans all the time as a way to punish their political enemies. Occasionally, they may be right. But as Lake pointed out, they were probably more likely to be concerned he would act in their homeland, and not in the US.
Then there’s the mosque that the elder brother attended, who told him he had to stop interrupting sermons and straighten his act up or he was no longer welcome. The younger brother didn’t attend. The mosque representatives condemned his actions publicly, as many moderate Muslim spokesmen have done. And yes, I too wish more would speak out louder than they do. But many do speak out.
There’s been some here who have said that the family should have been denied asylum and entry to the US. However at the time, none of the family was radicalized and there was nothing to indicate they would be a threat to national security. If there is lack of evidence, are we to change our immigration policy that merely choice of religion and country of origin is enough to deny entry that which, under other circumstances, would have been granted? People like to talk about slippery slopes here, but often the only slopes they are concerned about are those they feel are justified. Personally, I think considering religion and country of origin enough to refuse entry isn’t much in line with our nation’s founding. Much like protecting 1st Amendment rights INRE the Hustler lawsuit years ago didn’t mean you morally approve of that type of material.
Does immigration, or student visas etal, pose a risk? Hang yes… but sometimes this stuff happens after the fact, as in the case with these two. The Sept 11th perps? They should have been on the radar of the intel agencies, but weren’t because of the Jamie Gorelick “wall” preventing info sharing between agencies. But in the case of these two, I don’t see that radicalization, post living here for some time, is something they could have seen or detected with actionable evidence. Bomber One, the elder brother, didn’t travel to his homeland until after the FBI’s investigation. Altho, from what I read, it was due to an airlines misspelling of his name that he could not be questioned upon his reentry to the US. That’s definitely an error, but one that was committed by the airlines. His “domestic abuse” case? Haven’t seen the police files, but the reports I read was that he slapped his former girlfriend while they were arguing about another girl, and she called the police. Other details unknown.
Here’s the ugly parallel. I think this notion that Boston could have been “prevented” is rather like looking at gun control, and offering up medical records in NICS checks, in trying to prevent mass killings. Unless you’re willing to stomp on founding principles in the name of preemptive security measures, or start attaching new government regulations to the purchase of fireworks (as Harry Reid is already proposing), it’s going to be hard to catch all of it. Some of these loons they should have caught earlier… the shoe bomber, the Ft. Hood shooter, etc. But I don’t think these two were as obvious.
Bees, no clue what your point is. As I said, without tangible evidence, and prior to trials, no elected official or LEO/agencies should be volunteering up all that much info about motives, associations and intents. When it comes down to it, only the brain dead wouldn’t recognize these two were amateur jihadists. I, for one, feel no need for any officials to add the word “Islamic” in front of the word “terrorism” to validate what is obvious.
On the other hand, I can see many legal reasons why they shouldn’t comment on motives, intent and associations. Such statements can be an ace in the hand of the defense attorneys, as they argue bias as a reason for not being able to get a fair trial for the terrorist.
@Skookum:
We should never lay the fault on the reader for a thought expressed unclearly. Let me try again. If I understand you correctly, you are talking about “Islamic Terror” as a descriptor of a certain identifiable group of people who happen to be both terrorist and Muslim. I understand. My issue is not specifically with you perhaps, but with those in the comments section, and elsewhere (it’s a commonly expressed thought) who claim that Islam itself is intrinsically the main factor promoting and creating this terror. In other words, those who practice Islam are, if not predisposed, more susceptible to Terrorism. This approach 1) ignores the root causes of terrorism, such as the political, social and historical factors at play; 2) simplifies the conversation and potentially turns it into an “us against them” religious dichotomy. 3) plays right into the hands of groups like Al Queda and states like Iran in terms of recruitment, since we’re seemingly attacking a religion while ignoring all those other factors. The Mullahs of Iran, the main power players in Saudi Arabia, these people, I would wager, are hardly religious in their personal lives. Like other elites throughout history, they promote religion as a tool to control and motivate the masses no differently than Christianity was promoted for thousands of years (and in some places, still is). If religion is a static thing, are we to judge Christianity as it was wielded during the Inquisition? Islamic Terrorists may or may not be devout Muslims, and they may even frame their grievances in religious terms, but terror is politically motivated, not religiously programmed.
Tom, we don’t live in the inquisition. We live “now” and are judged by what we do now. And yes, people judge things in history that way all the time. Why should Muslims be any different or be exempt from that?
Even Bill Maher knows the difference. (see the post Broken Clock).
MATA
hi,
do we know who the FBI take their orders from.
is it from OBAMA or other beside their local leader,
and to who do they account of their actions to.
I previously heard the CIA account their actions and decisions to OBAMA,
is that true?
TOM
the MUSLIMS are a religion as well as a politic party,
they have merge the two together, and their follower obey or else,
and which ever side they use to profess the killing of INFIDEL,
it work on their follower to apply the rules if they can find a way, like being accepted in the USA
so easy now with all the open doors and request from the MOSQUE IMANS solid in the WHITE HOUSE with a PRESIDENT leaning strongly toward their RELIGION
he find the most beautiful peace loving of all, HE already made a choice and told them if there was a problem he would stand with them that from his firt trip to the MUSLIM COUNTRY. and he already did took their side against AMERICANS
where the attacks on AMERICA killing the most they can come from that so peaceful religion,
aiming at exterminate the JEWS and take over AMERICA
where they have already one foot in the high places of the WHITE HOUSE,
YOU would be better to not do like OBAMA and protect them, you are better to stick with the good old AMERICAN way and go kill your enemy or help those who do it for your freedom.
This is an unquestionably true statement. Islamists have a quest for ruling power of their perceived rightful Caliphate, as defined by terrorists (in the map drawn and shown to the two French journalists taken hostage way back in the early Iraq days) as the lands from Spain to Asia. And that is *very* political in nature.
Speaking of Spain, their quest for Andalusia is again made public just today via the UK’s Telegraph, referencing an article published by the Islamic Society of North America. When it comes down to it, Islamic jihadists are nothing more than thugs, seeking power to reign supreme over others, including their Muslim peers.
Mata.
The fact that G Bush was not nearly as eloquent, or that he did it badly, doesn’t negate the issue. At least he tried. He did manage to leave the word “nookular” with us. But, Obama “does” have the oratory skills to skate through the nuances of this and bring it to the fore. He just chooses not to on this particular issue.
There ARE people who are in denial, and/or don’t understand nor realize these things. And some of them are “Teachers”, professors, experts spreading the denial to others. Again…see the interview in the post about Broken Clock, where Bill Maher sits in amazement listening to a so called expert, professor on the subject who tried to make the same points that Tom is making. He asks…”what color is the sky in the world you live in”?
The other thing you are missing Mata is the fact that there “are” people out there using their pulpit to spin this the “other” way (ie. blame the victims). Ie., the whole “we” created the terrorist and made them do it thing.
Lastly, are we at war or are we not? As far as I know..there has been no declaration or statement from the president that we are no longer operating under that authorization from congress. And is this event part of that war…or not? YOu say everybody knows it is, they just don’t t say it. I say…not so, as there are numerous examples everyday of people demonstrating/saying just the opposite. I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
You guys are too much. So, you tell me Tom/Mata….what was the “political” motivation or reason for this attack in Boston?
Well, you answered your own question in your prior comment when you said:
I’m not “missing” that at all, Dc. Neither is Obama since he’s busy outcowboying Bush in that same war under the AUMF. I’ll take a wild guess you aren’t advocating for military action against Chechnya, right?
There are many of both political aisles that claim US foreign policy incites more jihad. And in case you didn’t notice, US foreign policy is political. However just because many pundits and politicians think US foreign policy is involved (erroneously, IMHO), doesn’t mean they are viewing the perps as “victims”. Don’t confuse criticism of foreign policy as a nod of approval.
Therefore, speaking of political, if you want to believe the reports of Bomber Two, he cites the presence of US troops in Afghanistan and Iraq. Then again, that’s just the general talking points playbook used by most the Islamists. Back in 1998, it was the US presence in Saudi Arabia. In the late 80s, before we were in the Arabian peninsula, they had another excuse. They’re always finding some reason. Remove that reason and they’ll pick another.
Me? I don’t care what the “motivation” is. That’s just defining an excuse/explanation for their behavior to come up with some BS attempt to change whatever it is that’s got a bee in their tagiyah. It’s no different than those that anguish over just how these kids got radicalized. As if we could stop that without intruding on Constitutional rights and tight controls on what is available on Internet. So who the heck cares, unless it happens to be from an active cell here on US soil that needs to be taken in. And that’s what the investigation is for.
“Know your enemy”? We already do. We need to find any cohorts in the crime, but we sure don’t need no stinkin’ “motivation” lip service. Oddly enough, Rush was saying the same thing about half way through hour three today. Doesn’t matter. They are bad guys, and they have a penchant for using any and all things they perceive as injustice to Islam as their reason for being bad guys. Seeking to define any type of “motivation” just plays into the trap that such motivation is, or is not, justified and perhaps we should do something to alter that.
Nothing justifies terrorism… by any group. And I, for one, won’t even give their “motive” the light of day for press.
INRE Wordsmith’s post about Maher and Brian Levin. I read the transcript, tho I never watch the show so can only speak to what Wordsmith cut/paste of the transcript. In that, Levin’s not giving the terrorists a pass for their actions. He was pointing out that terrorism isn’t confined just to Islam, nor are all Muslims terrorists. Maher rightfully came back and said that Islam seems to have a larger proclivity for that. That’s true, but it still doesn’t make all Muslims terrorists, nor does it portray terrorists as victims.
Perhaps you’ll want to point out just where he’s speaking of the Boston bombers, or any Islamist terrorists, as victims? Or, for that matter, denying they are terrorists?
@Dc: #46,
Its always about politics – someone seeking power over another, but when you can use the text of a holy book to affect consciousness of those you wish to manipulate, it’s so much easier. Most religions have been used as such at some point in their history.
There are sections of the Quran which take the demanding effort right out of the exploitation/indoctrination process, such as:
or,
or,
or,
These are translations, which also means ‘interpretations’ of the original, and you will find that there are many ‘explanations’ which go to soften the original intent for acceptance by non-Muslims, nevertheless what’s important is what those hell-bent on manipulation of others will do with these texts. I don’t think the word “infidel” appears in any version of the Quran.
You might find disturbing the texts in the Quran which relate to the role of women, since in this modern age it daily affect hundreds of millions of women around the world. Those may be more upsetting because there is less room for interpretation or rationalization.
religion of PEACE? hey
where do you see peace, you are trying to bring the young in that OBAMA?
and in AMERICA?
shame on you for lying to the young AMERICANS
@Liberal1 (Objectivity):
Liberal we already know what an ass you are, but trying to peddle Thinkprogress as a reputable source of information further negates any possibility that you will ever say anything credible…or even sane.
There is no right wing terrorism. It is all islamic and left wing, and all reputable historical sources will show that. See…on the right wing, we love and respect our country, our traditions and our Constitution…so we really don’t think blowing up innocents, ( like say…muslim terrorists, Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dorne, McVeigh, the Unabomber) or shooting politicians, soldiers or cops (Loughner, Squeeky Fromme, Bernadine Dorne) or beating up people who disagree with Obama (union thugs) fits with the principles we hold dear. It is you leftards that trash, destroy, denigrate, murder and committ violence like spoiled children who think you know better how to run things when you haven’t the faintest clue.
Compare any Tea party rally to your pals in OWS. Look up the rapes, murders and other violence from OWS, the ‘Black Block’ anarchists, the Weathermen and SDS groups. Find any credible source that shows any such violence and crimes ever occured at any Tea Party rally…you can’t.
You do know who started the KKK don’t you? Yeah…the left again…democrats…and it was the NRA that stood up and helped arm blacks in the south to fight the bigotted leftists.
So take your grossly misplaced self-righteousness and choke on it.
@Tom:
You are wrong. Read the Koran yourself. Spend a few years in isalmic controlled countries and see for yourself the intentionally designed poverty and brutality inherent in the satanic death cult of islam. The Koran tells adherents to lie to infidels to gain advantage over them. It tells them to either kill or subjugate into slavery all those who will not worship their demonic leader. It is not a religion, but is a brutal, dictatorial misogynistic political system masquerading as a religious system.
You do realize the chapters of the koran are arranged in order by the length of the chapters, not in any type of chronological order? You do realize that every time the meglomaniac Mohammed was caught breaking one of his own previously proclaimed rules from allah that he simply had another ‘vision’ where allah changed the rules so as to allow Crazy Mo to do whatever he wanted.
You do realize that the Crusades were a RESPONSE to the aggressive wars of conquest started by the followers of Crazy Mo as they pillaged every land they invaded? You do realize that the so-called religion of peace is actively murdering Coptic Christians in Egypt, bulldozing Christian churches in Malaysia, and issuing death warrants against people who speak out against islam, right?
You do realize that in Saudi Arabia no other religion can be openly practiced, right? And that in shariah courts a woman’s testimony is considered worth only half a man’s testimony? That someone convicted of theft gets a hand cut off? That women are not allowed to drive cars or go out in public without being escorted by a male relative?
Tear the politically correct blinders from your eyes. Islam is inherently evil. It does not work and play well with others. You have eyes but cannot see. Are Christians and Jews bombing each other’s houses of worship? Are Christians and Buddhists engaging in sectarian mob violence against each other? Are Taoists and Jews firing mortars and rockets at each other’s homes?
No…the only ‘religious’ group that is constantly fighting with other religions is islam. The only religion that considers lying, slavery, and killing nonbelievers as a duty of its adherents is islam. You ignore the historical evidence of islam at your own peril. You insist on blaming Jews and Christians for the evil acts of muslims out of your willful ignorance.
Pete
we couldn’t do without you,
thank you for explaining it,
bye
THE LORDS PRAYER , WITH THE MORMON TABERNACLE CHOIR
WITH ANDREA BOCELLI
you will bring your emotions up toward the ceiling,
THE LORD”S PRAYER WITH THE MORNON TABERNACLE CHOIR
WITH ANDREA BOCELLI
that is A peaceful listening , a real gift to bring up good emotions
high of toward the top,
I’M trying again to get this one in for the 3rd time,
THE LORD”S PRAYER WITH THE MORMON TABERNACLE CHOIR
SANG BY ANDREA BOCELLI
A GIFT TO MAKE EMOTIONS GO UP THE CEILING
CURT
why did my last comment be refuse 4 times?
it was about THE LORD”S PRAYER WITH THE MORMON TABERNACLE CHOIR
SANG BY ANDREA BOCELLI
SO TO BRING THE EMOTIONS HIGH UP
YOU fix it, they are all back
CURT
THANK YOU
checking