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
CURT
it’s gone again
it came back thank you
The CIA and the US “used” jihadists for political reasons to fight the Russians in Afghanistan. But, the foreign jihadists who went there…did NOT go to further US policy, nor for the politics of Russia OR Afghanistan. They went there as Muslims to fight a religious jihad against crusaders and Kufars to drive them out of Muslim lands.
And no, you didn’t answer my question: What did these bombers in Boston expect to gain politically from doing what they did? Withdrawal from Afghanistan? That’s already the policy we have…and underway. Iraq? We have already withdrawn from Iraq. I’m still confused what you think “Their” political motives were..or what they thought they would be gaining politically by bombing the Boston Marathon.
That’s not to mention that the boy has already admitted they did it “For their religion”. Maybe he’s lieing too? Or maybe he’s just confused and needs some US professor to straighten him out that he was actually doing this for political reasons.
The transcript is partial. The video was removed (probably copyright violation). I’ll see if I can find it somewhere else
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VgUBf0Fhrc
He’s denying that Islam has a problem with tolerance and he’s implying that it is no different than any other religion in that regard.
There were 3 honor killings in my neighborhood..where a good, hardworking, muslim father killed his own daughter. It wasn’t done because of politics.
Dc, you’re sorta all over the place here. Those that went to take up arms in the Russian/Soviet battle did so because the State was already in a civil war between Muslim factions over current regime rule, headed up by Hazifullah Amin. He wanted more Western modernization while the Mujahdeen fundamentalists did not. Their quest was to overthrow Amin’s governance and gain power. That is political.
The Russians then came in, claiming Amin’s admin requested their help. They denied any invasion, of course, but they considered the Mujahdeen terrorists. Amin, who knew of the Soviets invasion, made the mistake of trusting them. They assassinated him and installed Babrak Kamal – a Marxist more to the Russian’s liking – whom the Soviets supported against the Mujahdeen. Of course, following the fighting, Moscow thought he was a failure, so circa mid 80s, he was replaced an relieved of Presidential power. He returned to Moscow, where he had been living when they called in him to replace the assassinated Amin in ’79, and died there as a drunk.
So it was entirely political, and all about control of the government of Afghanistan.
INRE honor killings… it’s a despicable practice. But it’s not jihad. Honor killings are their barbaric tradition when family members think the family honor has been tarnished by unIslamic behavior. Jihad, tho actually interpreted as “Exerted effort” to Muslim scholars, is more commonly bandied about as a holy war. Honor killings are not to be confused with holy war, and are done by family members to family members. Not even close to terrorist attacks on innocents.
As far as the scumbag, Bomber Two, he said he was avenging US military action in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Also here at the Examiner.
Yet again in the SF Chronicle.
uh… can you say political? Again, it’s all about power and governance. Actually, to those two, I think they were just enamored of jihadist glory myself. But who cares? They are bad guys. Simple and sweet.
As I said, his motive don’t mean jack. They always find some excuse to justify their actions, and it changes with the direction of the wind. But both brothers were said to be focused on retaliating for what they saw as a war on Islam around the globe… just as the terrorist playbook dictates. In their demented minds, they are defending an attack on Islam. But again… that’s sorta like giving them an excuse, eh?
This type of “jihad” is not the contention of the majority of the Muslim world. They may not appreciate US interference in Muslim lands, and may even agree with fighting US troops abroad in Muslim nations. But they aren’t out to wipe out innocents, as terrorists like to do. It’s also a fact that Islamists kill more of their own than they do infidels.
All religions have their fanatics. Islam seems to have more than their fair share in the last three decades, and I doubt that escapes anyone’s notice.
Dc
hi,
maybe they had too much time of doing nothing and they already dislike their other
suppose friends they had shared the study with, they said they felt not belonging,
because they where already filled up with their mentality of hate which was consuming their inner core,
until the older went abroad to be with his known crowd he could freely speak his secret feeling
of becoming a real man by taking on the AMERICANS who are a SUPERIOR BREED from their roots,
which gave the terrorists a minority complex they could not understand by keeping their background dictating their mind, and they did not want to let go their roots, for becoming an AMERICAN full time
with a total loyalty to this generous AMERICA, helping them all the way. they go to war and fight enemies and many die
and get hurt because to protect them also
as all the people ‘s freedom,
so their decisions to kill as much as they could appeal to them for REVENGE, disregarding that protection also,
[ did you hear that word revenge before?] they all want revenge and are given kindness and the chance which real rooted AMERICANS take for granted, and are benevolent and accept the IMMIGRANTS
even those IMMIGRANTS DON”T ALL ACCEPT THE AMERICAN BENEVOLENCE as it is a natural TRAIT of the AMERICANS given to them from generations of good will people
aiming at finding the happiness and success,
as opose to those received from their generation the task to hate JEWS and WHOEVER is allied with the PEACEFUL JEWS, which are a PEOPLE in their own COUNTRY striving toward KNOWLEDGE to help the whole world, that’s who they are with AMERICA sharing it together,
and the other would like to conquer instead to share, and their hateful dynasty is has shaped the young to the logic mindset, to destroy their enemy which is by occupying the WORLD with immigrating and than kill the local rightful occupants raised from generations of peaceful mindset, and GOD LOVING
GENEROUS PEOPLE all over the world ,
except the MUSLIM countries
I’m no expert… But Islam is an “inflammatory” religion…. And now ADD to that, any “radical Liberal Professors” (they were college boys) filling these guys with their Anti-American leftist crap…. and the fuse got lit… maybe over simplified, but I’m willing to bet, it’s pretty close to the truth…. IMHO
Hankster58
I disagree, YOU ARE AN EXPERT,
what did you took you so long to come,
bye
Mata. with all due respect…nobody has still answered the question….what did they gain “politically” by doing this? The interpretation of it is they were retaliating for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The war in Iraq…was over “before” they bombed. So, they are not doing this for what is happening “now”..ie., ongoing military wars in Iraq. There is no war in Iraq now. So, they obviously also were not doing this to “stop” a war that has already ended.
I think you had it right here when you said:
That’s not a political reason, nor a political goal. It’s blood for blood retaliation for killing muslims in Iraq and afghanistan. Religious retribution for attacking people of the same religion (not politics) that they are around the world.
As far as Afghanistan in the 80s goes… I was speaking of the joint CIA/Pakistan/Saudi effort to radicalize the war into a religious one to draw in more “foreign” fighters against the russians. We had our own political reasons for doing that. The local afghans surely had their own reasons for fighting. But the religious zealot foreigners who came there to die so they could go to heaven…didn’t necessarily fight for the same reasons.
Dc, US foreign policy is nothing but political. As for what they “accomplished”… well, terrorism never accomplishes anything. So is success (i.e. a change of policy) the hallmark of whether it’s political or not to you? In which case, the Tea Party ain’t political either since Congressional GOP and Dems are virtually indistinguishable.
INRE the observation, “It’s blood for blood retaliation for killing Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan”. The problem with that pat answer is that it doesn’t address the Muslim on Muslim violence in those same regions. What they resist is any western, or non Muslim, nation… as well as what they consider apostate Muslim rulers.. influencing a Muslim nation out of their version of Islam (i.e. nation building and elections in Iraq and Afghanistan). Thus the reason that Afghanistan was in a civil war – Muslim on Muslim – before the Soviets set boots on the ground to aid in fighting the Mujahdeen.
Again, ruling power to install strict Shariah governance is political.
Dc, if you didn’t know, jihadis consider elections “unIslamic”. I wrote about this on my old blog, when Zawahiri did his “Open Conference” interview with select Muslim journalists, and Laura Mansfield provided the Part I of her translations for free. She has since put Part I and II into a wider perspective book on Zawahiri, His Own Words – A Translation of the Writings of Dr. Ayman Al Zawahiri.
I also mentioned the same in my Mar 19th, 2009 post here at FA, when UBL was trying to convince his masses to overthrow newly elected moderate Muslim leader, Sharif Sheik Ahmed, in Somalia. That’s because they don’t believe in elections, and a stated AQ goal is to overthrow every apostate Muslim ruler who doesn’t rule with strict Shariah fundamentals.
Obviously politics is a very large factor in jihad, as they wage the same against Muslims as well as infidels. Can’t exactly say “it’s for religion”, when both are Muslim, can you?
Also this lesser known beef from Islamists surfaced just recently when Pakistan Taliban group, Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, called for boycotting this month’s elections.
You can read about circumstances where those of strict fundamentalist Muslim beliefs consider an election acceptable here.
Thus the reason they get all grumpy and bent out of shape when we western whippersnappers advocate for elections of leaders in their Muslim nations. Altho that ain’t working out so great either…
@Skook #22:
I don’t believe those on the “politically-correct” side of things are trying not to offend those who hate us; they’re trying to be sensitive in not alienating those who do not identify themselves with Islamic terrorism, yet who feel they are being lumped together with radical Islamists and Islamic militants & jihadists.
Can’t say I blame them feeling under attack when folks actually do express hatred for Islam itself, choosing not to make any distinctions between its various practitioners, from Muhammad Ali to Sayyid Qutb.
@Skook:
I disagree to a degree, that Muslims have not been speaking out. They’ve been losing their lives over speaking out and resisting the puritanical constraints and violence of radical Islamists. When they do publicly condemn acts of Islamic terror, the skeptics among us always poo-poo it as taqqiyah and CAIR-induced talking out of both sides of the mouth; nor do their protests and statements from Islamic leaders receive wide media coverage. Also, reference my post.
@MataHarley #44:
I’ve mentioned it before: Graham Fuller’s A World without Islam. His perspective as I interpret it, is that even had Islam never come to exist, the Middle East would still be in dysfunction because so much of political Islam is about geo-politics and power, and much of the religious culture are inherited practices that pre-dates Islam. Religion is used for power and control.@Dc #46:
I believe it is the politics of how a segment of the left (and Ron Paul non-interventionist/isolationists on the right) believe that it is America’s foreign policy that is the problem- that we are the aggressors, imperialistic, responsible for innocent Iraqi civilians and children being murdered, abu Ghraib, etc.
Merge that anti-American-laced view with ethnic/religious/cultural ties and pride and the need that many young people have for identity….
“Jihadism” probably has a certain, sick, romanticized appeal to many young people looking for purpose and for influence upon the world. Some will perceive jihadis as “freedom fighters” protecting and avenging the death of innocent Muslims being killed by imperialistic American soldiers; other youths with no inherent ties to the Middle East or to Islamic culture but who have that same streak of adventurism within them, might don a Guy Fawkes mask and join up with OWS, thinking they are “fighting the good fight”.
The ones with their heads screwed on straight, of course, will sign up with a branch of the U.S. military.
@Dc:
No, but the Iraq war is not in the distant past; and Obama’s drone strikes outrages many Muslims in the Islamic world. The “war” is still on.
The older brother’s surely been doing his reading and researching for some years, previous. A daily does of Seymour Hersh, Michael Moore, far-left sites that only point out the horrors of Guantanamo, CIA torture, and gravitating toward jihadi literature….
Islam is a factor, yes. But it is the Islam of al-Qaeda/jihadi theology which is not Islam itself.
@MataHarley:
I believe honor killings also predate Islam, and is mostly culturally-rooted.
@Wordsmith:
Yes, honor killings predate Islam. They are also found in many cultures that never had any ties or familiarity with Islam. It is a despicable practice, as Mata noted, and had only one motivation. That is, power of men over women. And that desire of power of men over women can be found from the very first humans walking the planet up to today’s day and age.
However, it should also be noted that amongst today’s advanced societies, and in countries populated by the biggest religions of the world, that only Islam still accepts the practice as “normal”. Even amongst the most “moderate” of muslims, honor killings, while not necessarily commonplace, are accepted with not much more indifference, or objection, than kicking a dog might be here in America.
@johngalt:
Noted!
It might also blow the top off a few conservative craniums when they learn that Rand Paul agrees with the Obama DOJ/admin – that there might be occasions for using a drone to kill a US citizen on US soil.
Odd how events can turn words and previous political stances around on it’s ear, eh?
Wordsmith
hi,
WHAT I think is the AMERICAN MILITARY go and many lost their lives in a brutal inhuman way and other loose their arm or legs or else to have fought those terrorists,
the MUSLIMS who consider themself on the moderate side, should do their part in the extermination of those radical monster of death,
they must find the courage to expose at least their neighbors in their religion, their own people
yes fear is there but if the AMERICANS had fear they could not fight the same enemy as them,
the one keeping silent are yes profile the same as bad, and many do benefit from AMERICA help
at least they must have that courage otherwise they are nothing for this NATION, they are not loyal
to their new COUNTRY, but coward only and not AMERICANS which are the braves to die for their silence, why should it be like that? they should die also for the cause,
there is already too many in AMERICA,
remember THE DNC gathering when they stood up in force to ban GOD in there debates,
they already demand rights and which would be taken away from AMERICANS ROOTED,
that is telling us of what is coming in the USA and arrogantly soon enough, if there is no one and there is no one now to back them of where they belong and where they should be
that is no political voice loud enough to create changes, and sa long as this leadership encourage their presence and advances the danger for THE USA is very high,
@Wordsmith:
Hi Wordsmith,
I agree with many of your points, which you’ve expressed much more elegantly than I have, but I have to question this however:
I doubt there are Muslims who walk into Fahrenheit 9/11 or listen to Ron Paul at the RNC and walk out angry and susceptible to radicalism. If anything, I imagine there are many Muslims in America who are happy just to hear anyone in America talking about a taboo subject, something that is a common narrative in much of the Middle East regarding America, but never heard here. I think it’s far more likely radicalism is imported online, or in person, from overseas, by people who hate America and would make Michael Moore look like a Right Wing apologist by comparison. If there is any domestic ingredient, I would say perhaps it’s the Right Wing anti-Muslim rhetoric and anger, in conjunction with very real acts of anti-Muslim violence and vandalism, that impact Muslims in America every day, particularly after an event like Boston.
I’ll ask it one more time: It’s been said/claimed that these 2 boys did what they did….for a political reason. What did these 2 boys gain politically by doing this bombing?
What you have just described is “revenge” based on a religion. What “is” the Islamic world? And where is the country “Islam”?
@Dc:
DC, I didn’t respond to your question above about this, since it seemed to me that Mata covered it well. I’m not entirely sure what your confusion is regarding political motivation. “What did these 2 boys gain politically by doing this bombing?” You’ll have to ask them. It’s a fallacy on your part to tie their motivation to a defensible and logical outcome. It’s political because of the reasons driving the motivation. That’s what motivation is, something that drives an action. It’s not contingent on an outcome. I’m also not sure why you keep going on about the timing of their grievances. You make it sound like ten years ago is a long time. Depending on how you define it, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict goes back 60 – 200 years and it’s about things that are politically tangible, land, property, resources, control, power. Do you see that strictly as a religious matter?
2 sides can fight…and each can have different motivation. You’ve said that “politics” was the motivation for ALL such attacks. And so I ask the pertinent question….what did they gain politically for this attack that they have given their lives for? There would have to be an answer to that to square your logic/assumption. And there is not. They did not gain anything politically from this…and their motive was not politics. It was religion…which you also admit but do not see what I’m trying to say. US gov did not plant bombs in Boston.
I don’t know how else to say it.
The understatement of the last 3 decades.
As far as honor killings predating islam…..we LIVE NOW. How may of us “still” do honor killings? (hold up your hands)
In regards to changing policy in Iraq and Afghanistan…please use your head here. We are out of Iraq. And we have a forced/planned withdrawal from Afghanistan that was in place and started BEFORE this bombing ever took place. So, that could NOT have been their political goal (to change this policy). The drones are mainly in Pakistan and Yemen. …two places you did not mention and they did not mention (or supposedly mention).
They didn’t say…we did this for the drones. And IF they did….then their reason for doing this would NOT have been because of the Wars in Iraq and/or Afghanistan (ie, a political goal seeking to change policy) but for killing “muslims”. Please check your logic.
War, to the soldier who fights it…is NOT about politics. You can ask anyone who’s ever been in combat.
You read, (maybe…) but you resist learning, Dc. Apparently, unless you get an answer you want to hear, you will remain resistant. Can’t bother with this nonsense further, so this is my last input.
That the US is out of Iraq makes no difference to Islamists who see the west’s influence in putting elections in the very heart of their most treasured Caliphate as blasphemous to their grotesquely distorted vision of Islam.. elections which they consider unIslamic. They have waited in stealth to start overthrowing the apostate Muslim leaders who cooperate with the West. Most know it as “Arab spring”. It was predicted and promised by Zawahiri in his open conference that I linked to above circa 2008-09. To those of us expecting it, simply because we listened to their aberrations of religion, it was no surprise.
It is not for the blood of Muslims spilled, because the very same Islamists spilled more Muslim blood than American. They have no problems assailing their peers, as evidence thru history.
You insist they “gain” something from their actions, yet terrorism has not changed US foreign policy. In fact, it’s done the opposite. Terrorism motivated increased US military action both under Bush and Obama.
So if you insist they must “gain” something, and remain blind to the Islamists quest for governing power, then I guess what they gained was valuable 24/7 press, and more blanket anti-Islamic statements from some Americans. Any PR is good, just because it keeps you out there. But anti-Islamic statements from Americans is pure victory for Islamists.
NO Mata…YOU (and others) have insisted that they gain something politically by this. Not me..I’ve argued all along that this was not politically motivated….but religious.
So, they had nothing to gain politically from doing this that you can find….but that doesn’t matter….ie., it was still political…based on US policy. I think that about covers it.
Sad.
Really? Would you like to link to where I said that? Or are you confusing your own insistence that they “gain” something for it to be political, and deliberately closing your own eyes to the facts presented about geo-political Islamists, Muslim on Muslim violence and the promise to, and fruition of, overthrowing apostate Muslim leaders that cooperate with the evil west?
There also seems to be some confusion on your part that it’s important that the US is out of Iraq (nope, we still have base/presence there), and Afghanistan is on a withdrawal path (we are still there too). You, who apparently does *not* know this enemy, thinks that our “withdrawal” from these nations are sufficient to appease them… ergo, in your mind, that just *can’t* be a reason.
Were we in Iraq and Afghanistan, or even Saudi Arabia, when they attacked our embassies in the late 80s, Dc? Why on earth would you think that shuffling our troops and bases around in that region would make an iota of difference? Fact is, Islamists don’t even want our embassy presence in Muslim nations as it’s western influence that is unwelcome in their intended Caliphate… or haven’t you noticed?
Dc, you need to seriously ponder just why there is so much Muslim on Muslim violence. It’s going on before your very eyes daily, and has been for as long as you’ve been alive, no doubt.
Ask yourself…. why are fundamentalist groups always some of the loudest voices at the forefront of government overthrow in Muslim nations?
Why are hardcore Islamists protesting and boycotting elections in Muslim nations?
Why do Islamist Muslims kill more of their own than anyone else?
Why do you think the tribal warloads fight amongst themselves? They are all Muslim, and all children of Islam.
The answer is simple. Power and control. It doesn’t matter that these two bombers were at the bottom of the jihad food chain. They were recruited, trained, and/or inspired to be human lackeys for geo-political Islam.
BTW, you have had your questions answered multiple times by me, and others. In fact, your question was answered by Bomber Two himself…. but again you decide you like your own reason best.
That you refuse to accept the answer, complete with links to historical context, because it conflicts with your own more emotional conclusion is your choice. However do not continue to insist no one has given you an explanation.
Dc
I thought of your question: what do they gain for what they have done,
I think they gain THE PRESTIGE AMONG THEIR PEERS,
the peers are the other he learned from, no matter that they die, it’s a family pride also,
and the other terrorist to become, and those in the USA already they are energize by the scope of the killing and injuries, because they are of the same wishful killer mind,
for them , DEATH is not a problem , not at all,
it is a place where the 72 virgins will be giving them their wildest dream sexual gifts,
so ,DEATH is an end to their effort to answer the IMAN teacher of the book telling
to do this for the cause with the ending of ilimited pleasures forever,
this is a young 2 young or more at the age of sexual urges which are totally impress by the book they where raise to obey and believe, so we can expect their future actions if they are given easy tips like the
blowing bombs they made following the recipe given to them step by step.
the rest is what happen so terrible it’s unimagineble by ROOTED AMERICANS,
which are raise to be in a different upper level and GOD LOVING the 10 COMMANDS
so neither side understand the other, and the GOVERNMENT STUPIDLY bring them both together
in this AMERICA, as if they try to change their minds ingrained by centuries of teaching to hate whoever is different like CAIN killing ABEL for not being like him,
AMERICA stop that mixing, because you are responsible to loosing the young AMERICANS who get indoctrinate by those evil young person or TEACHERS who are under that mindset,
OBAMA, by welcoming the MUSLIM you inject the worm in the APPLE now rotting slowly
on some AMERICAN youth,
I am about to leave for work, but I want to thank all of you for your contributions. There has been a great deal of analysis of the situation among our readers, and it is obvious. The sage writing of Word was exceptional and seemed to be the thread that helped reason why these differences of opinion are here among us.
The quote of Deputy Defense Minister Danon of Israel is another binding element that i think we all agree upon.
This means infiltrating the mosques and universities until radicals no longer feel they can trust their recruits, like we did with Ayers, Bouduin, and Dohrn with their homicidal groups.
Now, they are respected by America’s Left, are prominent members and lecturers at our universities, and have the president’s ear. Obviously great things can be accomplished through stealth and infiltration of terrorist cells.
MATA
hi,
ONE THING I READ about RON PAUL AGENDA, it struck me as very logical,
I heard it from JUSTME95,
it’s the need to not extend the WARS ,which OBAMA change the NAME WAR into another not related name so to hide it he think,
but RON PAUL made a lot of sense by saying, he would send one active elimination to answer any threat,
and have the troops come back right after the work is done,
HE USE HIS OWN WORDS, I come in with my own words of what I understood and capture my agreement on how it should be done, not like straining the war to the point it is now because OBAMA sign a deal with KARZEI who is showing hatred for the AMERICANS MILITARY in there getting shot in the back by those they teach to fight and killing the enemies on top of that and getting killed and wounded for staying so long in there, where the ROE will not bring any VICTORY but ONLY COFFINS AND DISABLE BRAVEST OF THIS AMERICA,
@Dc:
Mata’s, and Word’s, point is sincere and correct. The extremist muslims perpetrate their acts of terrorism from a political standpoint. They just simply choose to do so under the guise of adherence to their religion. Everything they desire is political in nature, even when they dress it up in religious wrappings.
johngalt,
I accept people are being sincere.
….what is the political standpoint of the Boston Bombers? It defies logic to suggest that all of this is 100% political, and yet no one can identify what these 2 were after politically, what they stood to gain “politically” or what their goal was “politically”. There “is” however, plenty of evidence to suggest that this was an act of revenge/retribution for killing muslims in holy lands. That is not a political goal, nor a policy. It’s revenge.
@Dc:
You are thinking of the bombers in the individual sense. However, there are apparent links to a bigger group, and that is where the political motivation comes in. I will admit, though, that the individuals, such as in the case of the Boston bombers, revel in the religious motivation to commit such atrocities.
But we cannot concentrate on the individuals alone, or we lose sight of the forest from which they come. And that forest has behind it a political motivation dressed up in the religious ideology they project to the world. In the end, their motivation is nothing more than control over peoples and regions of the world, and that is purely political.
those who interrogate the bomber at the hospital where interrupted without even asking or be notified, they are SHOCK by the action,
that judge came and gave the miranda right to the bomber
when the questioning was not finish, who order it, well you should know that it’s OBAMA in charge of any of those decisions, so easy to see,
he doesn’t want to get the questionning to go further, WHY is the best QUESTION
if you can get a true answer, i’s not sure ,the FBI think valuable answers are lost because of the
guy come in and read the miranda,
COULD IT BE AN IMPOSTOR MAGISTRAT NOT CHECKED BECAUSE HE SAID HE WAS A MAGISTRAT
sent by ?????????????????????
the FBI claim the lack of communication between the agency,
the FEDERAL is being pointed at,
someone try to cut the info might be increminating that person in high place, or AN IMAN?
I think there is MUSLIM infiltration in all those GOVERNMENT AGENCIES PUT THERE BY THE LEADERSHIP LEANING ON THE MUSLIM SIDE AND their task is TO PROTECT THEM,
we could know if we find who is MUSLIM in all the AGENCIES IN THE FEDERAL ADMINISTRATION,
we are at the time to pay attention on who and where do they work in the GOVERNMENT this from
all scales of the ladder, going to the TOP LEADER
in AMERICA, and how come they get jobs that should belong to rooted AMERICANS,
more of it is they had been given order from the top
how’s that for willingly stop an interrogation,
is CAIR influence OBAMA to put a stop to what the TERRORIST would bring?
John..
Define: Lone Wolf.
The apparent link to a group is to the religious zealotry and ideals perpetuated and nurtured by radical Islamic groups and Imams all over the world who encourage intolerance, hate, and who sanction and condone murder of innocents.
To focus on the “political” aspect of this is simply one more attempt to divert attention away from the issues and problems that are unique to Islamic religion in the modern world we live in. And the fundamental role it has played in fomenting hatred and intolerance around the world that have led people to kill and maim in it’s name.
RAND PAUL came to FOX to explain what he meant, and
that has nothing to do with drones in THE USA,
he was talking of new weapons to pursue a terrorist and send the bullet from the car
he said it would be saving lives of the LAW OFFICERS IN A TAIL PURSUE
of those dangerous criminal terrorists,
there is new weapons,I read about it,