Tuesday, April 16, 2013

TERROR? OR RECREATIONAL VIOLENCE?



I just read a short article in the Weekly Standard on line, by Daniel Halper, about the bombings yesterday in Boston.  It refers to David Axelrod’s comment that Obama thinks the bombings had to do with ‘tax day’ rather than anything as sinister as ‘terrorism’ – hence Obama’s refusal to use that word in reference to the violence and FUCKING TERROR that took place during the Boston Marathon.

My first thought about this is – if this TERROR act had to do with tax day, why not blow up the frigging IRS building!  The courts would have never found a jury willing to convict the bomber!

Obama has a history of not calling TERROR what it is (Ft. Hood immediately comes to mind), and the reason is purely political and utterly disgusting.  He cannot HAVE acts of terror against Americans on his watch!  It would stain his legacy and show his lack of stones to interest in properly protecting this country.  His continual weakening of our military forces screams that he really couldn’t care less about the safety of the United States, both here and abroad.  Recall that he had to be FORCED by events to call Benghazi an act of terror – it was like pulling hens’ teeth, and he never really CALLED it that – he just danced around the idea that he did.

Anything that intentionally terrorizes people is an act of terror.  Boston WAS a terrorist act, no matter who set off those bombs.

Has Obama confirmed this yet?  WILL he?

4 comments:

  1. Isn't it weird that it happened in Boston, ie; THE place where the revolution started? And on Patriot's day?

    ReplyDelete
  2. 'Any time bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it’s an act of terror,' Obama said. On Thursday, he will speak at a service planned for Holy Cross Cathedral in Boston, the White House announced.

    [A real condemnation, eh?] From Wednesday's NY Daily News

    ReplyDelete
  3. No matter what Obozo says it is Terrorism.

    ReplyDelete