From Reuters, Israel has bombed Syria for the second time this week. Powerful explosions rocked the outskirts of Damascus early Sunday. Syrian state television said Israeli rockets had struck a military facility just north of the capital. Earlier this week, Israel carried out a bombing run to prevent missile transfers to Islamist militants (VIDEO). President Barack Obama defended Israel’s right to bomb targets inside Syria to protect themselves. Syria is a tinderbox about ready to explode and we have a “dithering” president who makes claims of acting if a “red line” was crossed and then backs off as he does with domestic policy like the clueless over his head “Community Organizer” in Chief he is. Being President is just a little different when you play chicken against those in the Middle East than the GOP isn’t Barack? Obama is between a “Barack” and a hard place and has no idea what to do. How’s that Arab Spring working out for you Mr. President?
Israeli jets devastated Syrian targets near Damascus on Sunday in a heavy overnight air raid that Western and Israeli officials called a new strike on Iranian missiles bound for Lebanon’s Hezbollah.
As Syria’s two-year-old civil war veered into the potentially atomic arena of Iran’s confrontation with Israel and the West over its nuclear program, people were woken in the Syrian capital by explosions that shook the ground like an earthquake and sent pillars of flame high into the night sky.
“Night turned into day,” one man told Reuters from his home at Hameh, near one of the targets, the Jamraya military base.
Amateur VIDIO of huge Explosion outside Damascus, Syria
Israeli warplanes bombed the outskirts of Damascus early Sunday for the second time in recent days, according to Syrian state media and reports from activists, signaling a sharp escalation in tensions between the neighboring countries that had already been exacerbated by the conflict raging in Syria.
Though there was no official confirmation that Israel had carried out the attack, the Israeli military later announced that it had deployed two of its Iron Dome rocket defense batteries near its northern border in response to what it called “ongoing situational assessments.”
Videos posted on the Internet by activists showed a huge fireball erupting on Mount Qassioun, a landmark hill overlooking the capital on which the Syrian government has deployed much of the firepower it is using against rebel-controlled areas surrounding the city.
Homeland Security Committee Chairman Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX) Says Terror Suspects Were Trained Before Boston Marathon Bombing Attacks
On FOX News Sunday this morning, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, told Chris Wallace that the Boston terrorist bombers, Tamerlan Dzhohkar Tsarnaeva, had some training prior to the before the Boston Marathon attacks. Wallace stated that the FBI now says that that toy remote controllers were used to detonate the bomb were sophisticated more than what was in the Al Qaeda online magazine Inspire. This is inconsistent from what suspect #2, Dzhohkar Tsarnaeva, told federal authorities. Rep. Michael McCaul responded that he is lead to believe from the signature pressure cookers device and the sophistication that there was a trainer(s) and it leads me to ask whether that trainer is in Pakistan or the United States.
From CBS News DC:
The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee says he believes the Boston Marathon bombing suspects had some training in carrying out their attack.
Rep. Michael McCaul is citing the type of device used in the attack — shrapnel-packed pressure-cooker bombs — and the weapons’ sophistication as signs of training.
Homemade bombs built from pressure cookers have been a frequent weapon of militants in Afghanistan, India and Pakistan. Al-Qaida’s branch in Yemen once published an online manual on how to make one.
Rep. Tom Cotton Rips President Obama … “Five Jihadists Have Reached Their Targets in the US Under Barack Obama”
Rep. Tom Cotton (R-AR) spoke on the House floor to raise grave doubts about the Obama Administration’s counterterrorism policies and programs. Cotton stated that in barely four years in office, five jihadists have reached their targets in the United States under Barack Obama: the Boston Marathon bomber, the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber, the Fort Hood shooter, and the Little Rock recruiting office shooter. Compare that to the number of Islamist jihadists that reached their target in the US following 9-11 under President George W. Bush … Zero.
Sorry, but this is an issue an it needs to be addressed, America’s safety is in question. It is a disturbing trend that this has occurred under this president. Obama refuses to tell the truth about the enemy. September 11, 2001 was supposed to be a wake up call for America. However, it would appear under Barack Obama that he is even afraid to utter the words, radical Islamist jihadist (Video). But Obama does not think there is a war on terror, its an overseas contingency operation. Barack Obama does not want us to jump to conclusions when it comes to jihadists, but when it comes to him jumping to conclusions in the George Zimmerman/Trayvon Martin case, the Cambridge Mass situation and blaming the right and the Tea Party for the ills of society, that’s ok.
From The Weekly Standard:
“I rise today to express grave doubts about the Obama Administration’s counterterrorism policies and programs,” said the freshman congressman from Arkansas. “Counterterrorism is often shrouded in secrecy, as it should be, so let us judge by the results. In barely four years in office, five jihadists have reached their targets in the United States under Barack Obama: the Boston Marathon bomber, the underwear bomber, the Times Square Bomber, the Fort Hood shooter, and in my own state—the Little Rock recruiting office shooter. In the over seven years after 9/11 under George W. Bush, how many terrorists reached their target in the United States? Zero! We need to ask, ‘Why is the Obama Administration failing in its mission to stop terrorism before it reaches its targets in the United States?’”
Islamist Terrorist Tsarnaev Brothers Killed MIT Officer Sean Collier Because They Needed A Gun … What, No Background Check?
Imagine that Democrats, individuals who wanted to commit crimes and acts of terrorism did not want to pass a background check to get a gun, go figure …
It is being reported at CBS News, MIT officer Sean Collier was murdered because the two Islamist Terrorist Tsarnaev Brothers needed another gun. However, after they killed officer Collier they were unable to unholster his weapon. What, you mean those with evil intent did not want to take the time to fill out the necessary paperwork and pass a background check like Democrats and Obama wanted to inflict on law abiding citizens? Yet, the good people of Watertown, MA are told by liberals like Senator Feinstein of California that they didn’t need assault-style weapons to protect themselves and shouldn’t even have the choice.
MIT Officer Sean Collier – Rest in Peace
“The original question is they walked up to that car and appeared they shot the officer in the head unprovoked, that it was an assassination. But why? How did that fit into their plan? The operating theory now in the investigation is they were short one gun. The older brother had a gun. They wanted to get a gun for the younger brother and the fastest and most efficient way they could think of doing it was a surprise attack on a cop, to take his weapon and go. Officer Collier had a locking holster, it’s like a three-way lock. If you don’t know how to remove the gun, you’re not going to get it out. There was apparently an attempt to yank it and they couldn’t get it and left. “
And Now for the Shock of the Day: Massachusetts Police Say Boston Marathon Bombing Suspects Didn’t Have Gun Permit to Carry Firearms
Hey Barack Obama, you can lash out all you want, this is why your ridiculous bill did not pass …
Here comes the shocker of the say for liberals, President Barack Obama, Sens. Feinstein and Chuck Schumer, and the other gun grabbing, gun registering, background check, anti-Second Amendment folks … the Boston Marathon bombing suspects didn’t have gun permits to carry firearms. Imagine that, the two terrorist bombers who shot and killed MIT Patrol Officer Sean A. Collier, 26, of Somerville, Mass. did not have a permit nor would they ever have contemplated getting one. How difficult was this for the AP and Reuters to report the facts that these killers did not have gun permits, further proving the liberal agenda of wanting to take guns and Second Amendment rights away from law abiding citizens. When will liberals ever admit that the laws they are putting forward do nothing to stop crime? What better example do they need that the gun fire exchanged between the two terrorist brothers, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and police HERE and HERE.
Imagine that Libs, MSM and Barack Obama, these two killers did not have permits to carry guns, so what background law would have prevented this?
Massachusetts police official say the brothers suspected of bombing the Boston Marathon before having shootouts with authorities didn’t have gun permits.
Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert Haas tells The Associated Press in an interview Sunday that neither Tamerlan Tsarnaev (tsahr-NEYE’-ehv) nor his brother Dzhokhar had permission to carry firearms.
He says it’s unclear whether either ever applied and the applications aren’t considered public records.
What’s this world coming to when an Islamist terrorist does not have a registered gun, does not adhere to the laws and pass background check? Oh the humanity. Next thing we will learn that the pressure cookers were unregistered as well as well as the explosives that the brothers used to throw at the police and used in the bombs at the Boston Marathon that killed 3 people and injured over 170. Is it any wonder why the Democrats anti-gun legislation failed and Obama’s knee jerk reaction to take advantage of the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting went down in flames. The bill was then pulled by Democrat Senate Majority leader Harry Reid because he did not want any debate on said bill, go figure.
EXIT QUESTION … HOW COME THE LEFT, OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS DON’T CARE AS MUCH FOR LAW ABIDING CITIZENS SECOND AMENDMENT RIGHTS AS THEY DO FOR DZOKHAR TSARNAEV’S MIRANDA RIGHTS?
Wow, Far-Left Bill Maher Calls Out Liberal Guest on HBO’s “Real Time” … Comparing Violence Of Islam To Christianity Is “Liberal Bullshit” (VIDEO)
OK folks, either Hell just froze over or its the sign of the apocalypse … I just agreed with Bill Maher 100%.
On Friday night, and it was not April Fools Day, during HBO’s ‘Real Time’ with Bill Maher, the uber-lib host told his guest that comparing Islamic violence to Christianity is “liberal bullsh*t.” WOW, did Maher just have a moment of lucidity? Recently Maher had made that comment that if liberals keep it up, they will lose him, referring the over taxation of anyone successful, and now this. Maher called out CSU-San Bernardino professor Brian Levin’s, director of the Center for Study of Hate and Extremism, comment that religious extremism was the same whether it was Islam or Christianity as the liberal bullsh*t for what it was. I have called out Bill Maher on many things; however, I have to give him credit on this one.
The debate between the two liberals was really quite remarkable and needs to be seen to be believed, see video below. Its about time some one on the Left have called Islamists and radical Islam for what it really is, a retaliatory, violent region that if you dare speak, write or think bad about Allah or Mohammed, death will come to you. Just ask Theo Van Gogh, oh that’s right, you cannot, he was brutally murdered. Listen to how uncomfortable the audience is with Maher’s comments. The befuddled director of the Center for Study of Hate and Extremism tried to equate all religions having hypocrites to all religions being violent. Bill Maher then peppered the liberal professor with the following, “there is only one faith who kills you or wants to kill you if you draw a bad cartoon of the prophet”. There is only one faith that kills you or wants to kill you if you renounce the faith.” Then, because the Maher actually dared take the position he did, the liberal professor implied Maher was an Islamophobe. The irony of this is that the dear professor slinging slurs at a liberal who does not agree with him is the director of the Center for Study of Hate and Extremism. Who’s the hypocrite?
Maher then through out the zinger to which his audience must have thought that they were at a taping of Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck … “all religions are not created equal. Maher asked whether the professor had seen the show, ‘The Book of Mormon’ and asked whether they could have made one called the ‘Book of Islam’? Maher then said, there is only one religion that threatens violence and then carries it out. OUCH! Professor Brian Levin said that Broadway could do the Book of Islam, to which Maher responded, tell me what color is the sky is in your world”. DOUBLE OUCH!
But Maher took issue with that claim, calling it “liberal bullshit” and said there was no comparison.
“You know what, yeah, yeah,” Maher said. “You know what — that’s liberal bullshit right there … they’re not as dangerous. I mean there’s only one faith, for example, that kills you or wants to kill you if you draw a bad cartoon of the prophet. There’s only one faith that kills you or wants to kill you if you renounce the faith. An ex-Muslim is a very dangerous thing. Talk to Salman Rushdie after the show about Christian versus Islam. So you know, I’m just saying let’s keep it real.”
“I am not an Islamophobe,” Maher replied. “I am a truth lover. All religious are not alike. As many people have pointed out — ‘The Book of Mormon,’ did you see the show? … OK, can you imagine if they did ‘The Book of Islam?’ Could they do that? There’s only one religion that threatens violence and carries it out for things like that. Could they do “The Book of Islam” on Broadway?”
Levin said “possibly so,” to which Maher seem dismiss his entire argument going forward.
The liberal professor was just perplexed that uber-lib Bill Maher had an opposing view point to his. After all, liberals are not supposed to disagree with other liberals. They are supposed to have one monolithic viewpoint against the Right. He even went as far to imply Maher was an Islamophobe and there lies the liberal playbook. If they disagree with you, demonize them, even if its one of your own. Imagine what they do to those on the Right? Finally. Maher completed Game, Set and Match when he stated the following, “Obviously, most Muslim people are not terrorists, but ask most Muslim people in the world that if you insult the prophet, do you have what’s coming to you. It’s more than a fringe element.” It is simply amazing and this professor is typical of most on the Left, they cannot understand that telling the truth about a religion and that the behave differently and insight people to violence as a reaction is not hate. IT IS THE FACT! And one note to the dear, misguided professor who could not understand that the topic being discussed was the Islam religion today vs. Christianity during the Middles Ages, there is a like thing called the Reformation.
The Gateway Pundit reminds us, that in 2011 Bill Maher told Muslim Rep. Keith Ellison the Koran is a “hate-filled holy book.”
Jordan Islamist Leader Praises Boston Marathon Bombing … “Happy to See the Horror in America” after the Explosions in Boston, MA
Don’t ever forget this America … as you grieve, as you try and rationalize what happened yesterday at the Boston Marathon as innocent people were killed, inured, had arms and legs blown off by two bomb explosions. As you are saddened by the events and wonder how such a thing could happen … other are relishing in the blood spilled. Stop trying to rationalize terrorism and people who just hate us because we are not them. Sadly, as Weasel Zippers states, this is an opinion that is held by much of the Muslim world. At some point, Muslims and Muslim leaders in this country are going to have to come forward and stand with America, the country they live in and against terrorism and radical Islam … instead of worrying out any backlash against them.
AMMAN, Jordan (AP) — The head of an extremist Jordanian Muslim Salafi group says he’s “happy to see the horror in America” after the explosions in Boston.
“American blood isn’t more precious than Muslim blood,” said Mohammad al-Chalabi, who was convicted in an al-Qaeda-linked plot to attack US and other Western diplomatic missions in Jordan in 2003.
“Let the Americans feel the pain we endured by their armies occupying Iraq and Afghanistan and killing our people there,” he said early Tuesday
Political Correctness: AP Stylebook Revises Definition of ‘Islamist’ as AP Caves PC Pressures … Term “Islamist,” Will No Longer Be Used To Describe “Islamic Fighters, Militants, Extremists Or Radicals”
If it looks like an Islamist, walks like an Islamist and talks like an Islamist, geuess what AP … It’s an Islamist.
Remember when the journalist news used to be about reporting the news and not about worrying whether someone felt uncomfortable? Now the AP wants to redefine the enemy of the United States. How about a new definition for the AP … gutless, politically correct cowards?
This is yet another example why many have no trust or respect in the MSM. Just days after dropping “illegal immigrant” from its influential stylebook, the Associated Press has revised its definition of another politically charged term, Islamist. The AP stated that it will no longer use the term ”Islamist” to describe an Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals. Instead, the AP now defines an ”Islamist” as an “advocate or supporter of a political movement that favors reordering government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam. Of course this was a result of the cowards at AP succumbing to the pressures of CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
Yup, here is one of the Islamists that the AP refuses to define as an Islamic Fighters, Militants, Extremists Or Radicals
Following on the heels of the Tuesday decision by The Associated Press to discontinue use of the term “illegal immigrant,” the news agency on Thursday revised its stylebook entry for another politically charged term. The term “Islamist,” the AP clarified in a Thursday afternoon alert to online stylebook subscribers, should not be used as “a synonym for Islamic fighters, militants, extremists or radicals.”
“Islamist” is frequently used as a label for conservative Islamic political movements, particularly Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, the group’s Palestinian offshoot. It generally carries a negative connotation.
The AP first added the term to its stylebook in 2012. The definition initially read:
Supporter of government in accord with the laws of Islam. Those who view the Quran as a political model encompass a wide range of Muslims, from mainstream politicians to militants known as jihadi.
Just how gutless and politically correct has the AP become? These folks are more worried about if they upset terrorists than they are in correctly and accurately reporting the news. If these jokers were around in the 1940′s I am guessing that they would have provided cute and flowery definitions for the term Nazi’s and fascists.
Sorry, but we will continue to use the term “Islamist” as it is meant to be and for effect we will add the term radical jihad Islamist fascist for effect.
Posted April 6, 2013 by Scared Monkeys
al-Qaeda, AP, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islam/Muslims, Islamofascist, Media, Media Bias, Middle East, Misrepresentation, Moonbats, Murder, Muslim Brotherhood, Political Correctness, Progressives, Radical Islam, Radicals, Taliban, Terrorism, War on Terror, WTF | 3 comments
Sen. Rand Paul (KY-R) To Hillary Clinton at Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on Benghazi Terrorist Attack: ‘I Would Have Relieved You Of Your Post’ (VIDEO)
Yesterday during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Benghazi, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) criticized Secretary of State Hillary Clinton over the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans. Paul was one of the few that held nothing back and held Hilary Clinton’s feet to the fire for the responsibility, culpability and accountability for the Benghazi terror attacks. During his statements to Clinton Rand Paul stated, “Had I been president and found you did not read the cables from Benghazi and from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post.”
From the HUFPO:
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) criticized Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Wednesday during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing over the terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans.
“I’m glad that you’re accepting responsibility,” said Paul. “I think ultimately with your leaving that you accept the culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that.”
“Had I been president and found you did not read the cables from Benghazi and from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post. I think it’s inexcusable,” he said, referencing Clinton’s comments that she had not read all of the documentation surrounding the attack.
“I think we can understand you’re not reading every cable,” Paul said. He added that he didn’t suspect Clinton of “bad motives” but said that it was a “failure of leadership.”
Mother of 3 Year Old Boy Named “Jihad” Sent Son to Nursery School Wearing Shirt with Words “I am a bomb” Faces Trial in France
I guess this is the reason why many schools have uniforms …
READING, WRINGING and TERRORISM … A mother faces trial in France after she sent her three year old son to nursery school wearing a shirt with the words in the front, “I am a bomb” and in the back “Jihad” & “Born on September 11″. What kind of hateful individual used their child as a political/terrorist propaganda tool? One who supports terrorism I guess. believe it or not the son’s name is “Jihad” and she claims he was born on September 11. However, the “I am a bomb” is not quite passing muster. According to reports the mother “was very surprised by the reaction” to the incident, which she called a “provocation,” and said she did not expect the case would “assume such proportions.” Hmm, I wonder whether she was surprised by the reaction of Americans to September 11, 2001?
A MUM who sent her three-year-old son named “Jihad” to nursery school wearing a top bearing the words “I am a bomb” is to go on trial in France.
Beneath the boy’s name on the back of the jumper were the words “Born on the 11 September” – the date of the 9/11 terror attacks on New York’s twin towers.
The muslim mum was reported to police by the boy’s outraged teacher and has now been charged with supporting a terrorist act.
More from the Times of Israel:
The incident took place on September 25 in the town of Sorgues, in the district of Avignon, southern France, but has only been reported now. The divorced woman’s brother, who allegedly supplied the offensive shirt, is set to face charges together with his sister. According to the French daily Le Figaro, the two were remanded in custody awaiting their trial, which was set for December 19.
According to reports, when the kindergarten teacher noticed the message on the clothing, she gave the child another shirt to put atop the offensive garment, and notified the authorities.