The “Wrong” Suspects in Boston


suspects

Well, Boston police did not produce the category of suspect that most of the mainstream media and former advisors to the Obama Administration almost immediately speculated, indeed, fervently HOPED it would be.   The suspects are not white ‘Tea Party’ anti-government types, who picked the city, Boston, and the day of the attack, Patriots’ Day, for the symbolic value of violent opposition to President Obama.

Instead, the suspects were two young brothers from Chechnya, an overwhelmingly Sunni Islamic region.  Though motive is certainly difficult to determine for sure immediately, the chances are now ZILCH that it was anti-Obama Tea Party villain or villains who decided to slaughter innocent Americans.   Despite myriad commentary that virtually campaigned for a conservative white male to be the target.

CNN’s Peter Bergen speculated that the terrorists were “right-wing extremists”.

Charles Pierce, of Esquire, gave us this bit of brilliance:

I would caution folks jumping to conclusions about foreign terrorism to remember that this is the official Patriots Day holiday in Massachusetts, celebrating the Battles at Lexington and Concord, and that the actual date (April 19) was of some significance to, among other people, Tim McVeigh, because he fancied himself a waterer of the tree of liberty and the like.

There was, of course, David Sirota at Salon.com, who expresses his strong preference for white terrorists, while somehow missing the point about radical Islam actually close to BEING an existential threat.

Michael Moore was, of course, certain of the guilt of the Tea Party he despises so much.

And, also, this from taxpayer-funded NPR‘s Dina Temple-Raston:

“April is a big month for anti-government and right-wing individuals,” she said.

“There’s the Columbine anniversary. There’s Hitler’s birthday. There’s the Oklahoma City bombing. The assault on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco,” she added.

There are a host of other instances of such wishful speculation, on the talking head panels, the liberal blogosphere, and on “twiddah” from the not-so-cerebral far Left.

The most telling, disturbingly so, was the commentary from former Obama adviser David Axelrod.  He posited rather confidently what would be President Obama’s thought process and first instinct.   While he couches it in softer language, his message is clear.  President Obama first looks to his political opponents as the possible terrorists, and opposition to him and his policies as the motive.  Axelrod is eminently correct in his assertion.

This, despite the fact that those who believe in the Constitution and oppose his explosive government growth, intrusion into our privacy, curtailing of our freedoms, and raiding of our wallets have never violated the law, threatened to violate the law, or considered indiscriminate murder of innocent people to be the way to get their points across.  Unlike Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, who still do.

The Obama Administration has to be bitterly disappointed.  The terrorists weren’t “home grown” white men who fit Janet Napolitano’s description of Veterans who believe in smaller government, the Second Amendment, and God.     They did not give him a reason to further restrict the rights of the law-abiding, or to disparage those who disagree with him as unreasonable and dangerous criminals.

In fact, these terrorists, who they are and what they did, both at the Marathon on Monday and last evening, put paid to the falsehood that infringing on the Constitutional liberties of the law-abiding with draconian gun laws will prevent someone intent on evil from perpetrating that evil.   Fresh off the stinging rebuke of his anti-gun platform by a Democratic Senate, President Obama cannot even leverage his beholden press to further demonize non-liberal white males as terrorists and murderers who pose a threat to our freedoms.

However, there should be considerable alarm at the willingness, or rather enthusiasm, with which the majority of our media and government officials ruminate, without proof or precedent, on the collective culpability of an entire segment of American citizens.   They simply rub their hands and wait for a chance to bring the full weight of government authority and public opinion (to the extent that they influence the latter) to bear against those they disagree with.

Well, maybe next time.

In the meantime, I will cling to my guns and my religion and the Constitution.   But I have no illusions about the desire of my own government to target me, because of my race and my beliefs, and label me an enemy.    After this fiasco in Boston, none of us should.   All they need are the “right suspects”.

About these ads

4 Comments

Filed under history, islam, obama, ossettia, Politics, recruiting, Uncategorized, war

4 responses to “The “Wrong” Suspects in Boston

  1. The loud mouthed Left doesn’t “get it”. If the “tea party” were fighting someone, it would be them and the government. LOL Seriously, no American is going to just blow up other Americans (with the exception of McVey and his “white supremacists” or whatever they were – or maybe the New Black Panthers and their group).

    Right Wingers don’t like BIG government, want to keep their guns and won’t back down. They won’t kill innocent people though. Ever.

  2. sean

    As ever my friend your right on target. I thank God he had the grace to place you on my pat

    Sean

  3. Pingback: Boston Bombing Suspects: Grassroots Militants from Chechnya | danmillerinpanama

  4. Pingback: Opinion Forum » Boston Bombing Suspects: Grassroots Militants from Chechnya