Saturday, April 20, 2013

Why is Obama lecturing us? What did we do wrong? We were just viciously attacked after our FBI judged the terror mastermind no threat. Obama doesn't feel bad for us, tells us not to jump to conclusions about groups

.
4/20/13, "Why is Obama lecturing us? What did we do?" Free Republic poster Willliams

"Who was Obama lecturing? We just went through a terrorism situation. Not only did he refuse to use the word "terrorist", he gave us a long lecture about "not jumping to conclusions" about motives, religion, immigration, ethnicity. We were attacked and he lectured us about being good Americans. 

He even made it sound like we should not assume the terrorists are guilty. 

But Obama must know even more than us that they are terrorists, muslims, and most certainly guilty. 

I'm really wondering, when he said we must ask how people raised here and living among us can hate us and kill us - I think he meant  

there is something wrong with US that makes people hate us. 

Obama is far from the first liberal to believe there must be a reason people hate us. Just as Jeremiah Wright said America's chickens came home to roost. 

I think Obama was angrily lecturing us because he's annoyed the terrorists are muslims and he's upbraiding us that it's unAmerican to even think that. We didn't do a damn thing wrong yet somehow he was wagging his finger at America because innocent people got blown up at the Boston Marathon. He was performing for his left wing base."


======================================

4/19/13, "FBI interviewed dead Boston bombing suspect years ago," cbsnews.com

"The FBI admitted Friday they interviewed the now-deceased Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev two years ago [2011] and failed to find any incriminating information about him.

As first reported by CBS News correspondent Bob Orr, the FBI interviewed Tsarnaev, the elder brother of at-large bombing suspect Dzhokhar A. Tsarnaev, at the request of a foreign government to see if he had any extremist ties, but failed to find any linkage. 

The FBI is likely to have run a background check, running his name through all the relevant databases, including those of other agencies, checking on his communications and all of his overseas travel. Miller reports that culminated in a sit-down interview where they probably asked him a lot of questions about his life, his contacts, his surroundings. All of this was then written in a report and sent it to the requesting government.

This is an issue they've had in the past. They interviewed Carlos Bledsoe in Little Rock, Ark., before he shot up an Army recruiting station in 2009.

They were also looking into Major Hasan Nadal before the Fort Hood shootings.

However, the FBI has maintained in those incidents that they took all the steps they were asked to and were allowed to under the law.

Although the FBI initially denied contacting Tsarnaev, the brothers' mother said they had in an interview with Russia Today.

Zubeidat Tsarnaeva said her son got involved in "religious politics" about five years ago, and never told her he was involved in "jihad."

She insisted the FBI "knew what he was doing on Skype" and that they counseled him "every step of the way."

Tsarnaeva, who is a U.S. citizen currently in Russia, told Russia Today the FBI had called her with concerns about her elder son, although she did not specify when exactly she was contacted.

"They used to come [to our] home, they used to talk to me ... they were telling me that he was really an extremist leader and that they were afraid of him," Tsarnaeva said. "They told me whatever information he is getting, he gets from these extremist sites... they were controlling him, they were controlling his every step...and now they say that this is a terrorist act!""
.
======================================

Per the above article, the FBI was alerted by another government that Timerlan was a threat. They checked a few databases, had one face to face conversation with him around two years ago and determined he was no problem:

Tamerlan had a domestic violence charge that went to jury trial in 2010. According the The Globe the case was eventually dismissed:

4/19/13, "Older brother, killed after shoot-out, ‘was up to no good,’ cousin says," Boston Globe, Arsenault, Abelson, Wen, and Filipov

"Tamerlan has a domestic violence charge which was dismissed following a jury trial in 2010, according to records and was cited by state police for obstruction of a motor vehicle in 2008. That case was dismissed after he paid court costs."..(item 3/4 down pg.)

-----------------------------------------------------------------
.
Transcript of Obama speech after Boston terror bomber caught in Watertown, Friday night, 4/20/13:

"FULL SPEECH: President Obama thanks Boston after bombing suspect is captured," the OaklandPress.com

paragraph 6

"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?  How did they plan and carry out these attacks, and did they receive any help?  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....

paragraphs 8, 9, and 10

They failed because, as Americans, we refused to be terrorized.  They failed because we will not waver from the character and the compassion and the values that define us as a country.  Nor will we break the bonds that hold us together as Americans.

That American spirit includes staying true to the unity and diversity that makes us strong -- like no other nation in the world.  In this age of instant reporting and tweets and blogs, there's a temptation to latch on to any bit of information, sometimes to jump to conclusions.  But when a tragedy like this happens, with public safety at risk and the stakes so high, it's important that we do this right.  That's why we have investigations.  That's why we relentlessly gather the facts.  That's why we have courts.  And that's why we take care not to rush to judgment -- not about the motivations of these individuals; certainly not about entire groups of people.

After all, one of the things that makes America the greatest nation on Earth, but also, one of the things that makes Boston such a great city, is that we welcome people from all around the world -- people of every faith, every ethnicity, from every corner of the globe.  So as we continue to learn more about why and how this tragedy happened, let's make sure that we sustain that spirit."...

======================= 

Ed. note: As the poster said, Obama didn't mention "terror" or "terrorism."

========================

Obama fails to take his own advice about 'not rushing to judgment:'

4/20/13,  "Obama's rush to judgment," Breitbart, John Hayward

"That sounds like great advice.  Too bad nobody gave it to the whiny hyper-partisan Barack Obama who had an emotional meltdown in front of the cameras when his push for gun control legislation failed.  He certainly didn't have any trouble "jumping to conclusions" and making a "rush to judgment" about the "motivations of the individuals" who opposed him.

Neither did his ally, former Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who penned a despicable New York Times editorial in which she repeatedly assailed opponents of her political agenda as cowardly puppets of the almighty NRA who don't care a whit about the murder of children.

No rational argument for gun control is advanced by the likes of Obama or Giffords. Their entire case rests on scurrilous presumptions about the motives of those who oppose them.  They deny the very possibility of reasoned disagreement.  The only motivations for resistance to their agenda from pro-Second Amendment leaders are greed, or fear of the juggernaut gun lobby; due allowance for dangerous stupidity is made for their constituents out in flyover country, who bitterly cling to their guns as if they were religious totems (as Obama once put it) or fetishize them like a middle-aged swinger advertising his virility with a new Ferrari (as Vice President Joe Biden recently suggested.)

In short, gun control enthusiasts win the argument by default, because there is no legitimate reason to resist their demands.  And they don't seem very concerned about preserving the "unity and diversity that makes us strong" if sacrificing it means they might be able to add a few hundred more gun laws to the thousands already on the books.

Obama's philosophy treats his political enemies far more harshly than the heavily-armed and murderous enemies of the American people."






.

No comments: