Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wrote “F*** America” & “Praise Allah” on the Side Panel of the boat He was Captued in Watertown, MA
Does anyone else need any more information as to what motivated Dzhokhar Tsarnaev and his brother to detonate bombs at the Boston Marathon?
As reported by ABC News, police discovered that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wrote inside the boat, as he lay bleeding and in a standoff with authorities, “F*ck America” and “Praise Allah”. The also found that he wrote in black ink several anti-American comments, including references to Iraq, Afghanistan and “the infidels.” So does any one else need any more information as to what motivated these two terrorist to kill innocent Americans? Enough of what motivated them, they are radical Muslims, they are not criminals or sociopaths.
Hmm, so I wonder if Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, smitten female teen fans care about this either? Or are they just that ignorantly, stupid and hopelessly lost?
As police searched for him, and as he lay bleeding in his boat hideout, Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wrote “F*** America” on the side panel of the boat, police in Massachusetts told ABC News.
Officers said they also discovered the phrase “Praise Allah” on the boat’s side panels and several anti-American screeds, including references to Iraq, Afghanistan and “the infidels.”
A Massachusetts official showed ABC News what he said was a cell phone picture of the phrase “Praise Allah,” written in black ink, with a bullet hole above it, believed to have been written by Dzhokhar as he hid inside the boat in Watertown, Mass.
Also seen in the picture was the faintly written word “brother,” which the official said was part of a reference by the younger Tsarnaev “that was something about his brother is lucky to be with Allah first.”
Megyn Kelly Rips Liberal Guest Simon Rosenberg Over Benghazi Talking Points … ‘Can We Have Some Honesty?’
Fox News host Megyn Kelly once again showed that she has no tolerance for liberal BS as she blasted her liberal guest, Simon Rosenberg, founder of the progressive think tank NDN, during her show Thursday while discussing the 12 times edited Benghazi talking points. Kelly asked … “Can we have some honesty?” This actually needs to happen more often when liberals try to mislead on TV, radio or the Internet. It can be done respectfully; however, it can no longer be allowed for those with an agenda to mislead, be allowed to do so. An opinion is one thing, but trying to mislead and misrepresents the facts has to be called for what it is.
Hat Tip: The Blaze via Mediaite
“What?” a baffled Kelly asked. “Did you know that the State Department was heavily involved in editing the talking points?”
Rosenberg responded that “we know that there were terrible mistakes made on the ground in Libya that allowed this tragic event to happen” and “we know that for several weeks afterwards the administration was confused about what happened.”
“We don’t know that,” Kelly said.
She went on to note that White House press secretary Jay Carney had said that only very minimal changes to the talking points were made. “Maybe I’m just naïve because I was still believing Jay Carney until I saw all this evidence.”
After Kelly asked again whether or not Carney misled the American public, Rosenberg repeated the point that nothing had “materially changed,” noting that “we know there was confusion.”
“You’re telling me Jay Carney was being truthful? He made a mistake twice in November and then again in May?” Kelly shouted. “Come on, Simon! It is not a mistake to say that it was only stylistic changes and only one word was changed.”
“That’s not a mistake when we now know that the White House was the one meeting on this issue. I just — can we have some honesty? Wouldn’t it be so great?”
Boston Marathon Bombings Suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev Left Note in Boat he Was Captured By Police … Bombing Were Retribution for U.S. Military Action in Afghanistan & Iraq
Hey Baarack Obama … Can we make assumptions now that Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were radical Islamic, Muslim terrorist?
CBS News is reporting that Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev left a note in the boat where he was captured by police in Watertown, MA that the bombings were in retribution for United States military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. Dzhokhar also went on to say that the Boston Marathon victim were collateral damage. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev also wrote that his older brother was a martyr and in paradise and that if you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims. This should put an end to those still wondering why the Tsarnaev brothers did what they did. Even the “smitten teens” who think he was innocent because he was cute may even have to rethink their stupidity. These notes will come back to haunt Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as there is no way, Miranda rights or no Miranda right provided to their terrorists, that this evidence will not be immiscible at trial.
Sources tell Miller that Tsarnaev wrote the note in the boat he was hiding in as police pursued him, and as he bled from gunshot wounds sustained in an earlier shootout between police and his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev.
The note, scrawled with a pen on the interior wall of the cabin, said the bombings were retribution for U.S. military action in Afghanistan and Iraq, and called the Boston victims collateral damage in the same way Muslims have been in the American-led wars. “When you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims,” the note added.
Dzhokar said he didn’t mourn older brother Tamerlan, the other suspect in the bombings, writing that by that point, Tamerlan was a martyr in paradise — and that he expected to join him there.
According to Miller, the note will be a significant piece of evidence in any Dzhokar trial — it is “certainly admissible,” and paints a clear picture of the brothers’ motive, “consistent with what he told investigators while he was in custody,” Miller said Thursday on “CBS This Morning.”
Miller explained that while Dzhokar admitted many of the same details to authorities, those admissions came “during the time he was interrogated but before he was given his Miranda warning.” The note gives prosecutors supporting, clearly admissible evidence even if there is an fight over whether things he said before he was given his Miranda rights are admissible as evidence.
I bet Dzhokhar Tsarnaev wishes he had written those words in the boat in invisible, erasable ink now.
Under mounting pressure from tri-partisan demands of Republicans Democrats and the MSM … Obama Administration does late afternoon document dump of Benghazi emails.
As reported at CNN, the Obama Administration released more than 100 emails late Wednesday afternoon in an attempt to stop the political hemorrhaging. Obama and his minions have blinked. The AP, yes the same AP that Obama’s DOJ secretly obtained phone records sparking yet another scandal, reported that the White House had until now declined to make the documents public and had let congressional investigators review the documents without making copies. Some how the White House thinks that editing the emails to release a narrative on Benghazi to the point that the taking points became a complete fabricated lie is ok.
Jake Tapper discusses some of the releases emails with Wolf Blitzer
All of the emails can be read HERE (pdf.)
The White House released more than 100 pages of e-mails on Wednesday in a bid to quell critics who say President Barack Obama and his aides played politics with national security following the deadly attack on the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya.
The exchanges detailing discussions between top Obama administration officials from multiple agencies suggest the CIA took the lead in developing talking points to describe the attack last September 11 that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.
Those talking points, which were requested by members of the House Intelligence Committee, were originally drafted by the CIA. The lawmakers had requested unclassified information they could use in media interviews. Following the original drafting of talking points, CIA analysts made a handful of significant changes, according to administration sources.
Isn’t it ironic that David Axelrod had stated that the Obama White House should release the Benghazi emails and puff, there they are after all this time. It is simply incredible that Democrats continue to make this political and about maintaining power rather than the deaths of four Americans who were put in harms way without the proper security and then left to die as no help came to save them. David Axelrod, Obama apologist , now turn Hillary Clinton defender, stated on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” that Republicans are trying to bully Hillary Clinton out of running for president by attacking her on Benghazi, Libya. For Democrats like Axelrod, politics is their religion and they will do and say anything to maintain their power, even when it is so obvious that the State Department made major errors that resulted in the death of four Americans, including Ambassador Stevens. For Democrats, its not about the truth, its not about learning from this so that it never happens again, its not about holding those accountable … its about protecting Hillary Clinton for 2016. Sad, truly sad as four brave Americans were left to die.
UPDATE I: From the PJ Tatler, “Well, the White House has just made things even worse. The released emails begin on September 14, three days after the attack. By then, both President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton had been blaming a movie for two days.”
WOW … Kirstin Powers on Obama’s Benghazi Press Conference: “I’m Just Going to Call Them Lies Because They’re Lies” … “Nobody Thought He Called It a Terrorist Attack”
Kirsten Powers has grown tired of the
Lion Lying King, Barack Obama.
Kirstin Powers lets President Barack Obama have in on Fox News ‘Special Report’ as she comments on Obama’s press conference being full of lies. Did we mention that Kirsten Powers of a Lefty? Are those on the LEFT finally getting tired of the “Lying King”? Powers went on to say, “And, I’m just going to call them lies because they’re lies. They’re on tape. Nobody thought that he called it a terrorist attack.” Be careful Kirsten, you may be audited next by the IRS or have your phone tapped. Powers is correct in saying that no one believed that Obama called the attack on the Benghazi consulate a terror attack, because he did not. Obama and the rest of his minions blamed it on a video tape. As Kirsten Powers stated, “Now at what point are people going to get tired of the president coming out and over and over saying things like don’t believe your lying eyes?” Honesty, not soon enough as Obama was reelected in 2012 and thus the reason why he and Team Obama politicized and covered up what really happened in Benghazi.
“He’s so centrally involving himself with these repeated lies. And, I’m just going to call them lies because they’re lies. They’re on tape. Nobody thought that he called it a terrorist attack. Last night I went up and I looked at The New York Times how they reported it (Benghazi) the day after. They never reference that we had a terrorist attack against the United States. On September 20th, however, they run a story that says Libyan envoys killing was a terrorist attack. And they say until now White House officials have not used that language in describing the assault. That is September 20th. That is The New York Times. Now at what point are people going to get tired of the president coming out and over and over saying things like don’t believe your lying eyes?“
Kirstin Powers on Obama’s Strategy: I’m Just Going to Call Them Lies Because They’re Lies
Hat Tip: The Gateway Pundit
Ain’t Love Grand … Smitten Teen Girls Stir Up #FreeJahar Mania for Terrorist Killer Dzhokhar Tsarnaev
There really is a sucker born every minute and in this case, many clueless, dimwitted idiot(s). Maybe it’s time to raise the age of voting to 21.
This is what we have to look forward to from future generations … Ain’t love grand, or in this case terrifying. Thousands of ignorant, foolish teenage girls are crushing on 19 year old Boston marathon bomber Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev. That is correct, swarms of misguided teens think he is innocent and tweet, #FreeJahar, about the murderous teen. Some are even getting inked with inspirational tats. GOOD GRIEF. A note to these cluless teens, Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev is not Justin Bieber, he is a killer who thought nothing to put a bomb in a public place like the Boston Marathon hoping to murder as many people as possible. Thankfully police killed one of these terrorist. As reported at TMZ, there’s a Facebook group dedicated to freeing the alleged terrorist that has more than 6,000 followers. What is wrong with you, is this what America has to look forward to? Is this how far the morals of today’s youth have fallen? Maybe if public schools actually taught what radical Islam was, some individuals might have a clue. I wonder if any of these teens actually can define jihad or caliphate?
A note to the fools of #FreeJahar Mania, maybe you would like to look into your soul, of you have one, and care more about the memories of the lives that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev took when he participated in the Boston bombing, rather than crushing on a killer. Gone are 29 year old Krystle Campbell of Arlington, Massachusetts, 8 year old Martin Richard of Dorchester, Massachusetts and 24 year old Boston University graduate student Lingzi Lu of Shenyang, China. These people are dead, does that resonate at all in your empty mush you call a brain?
Martin Richard (left), Krystle Campbell (center), Lingzi Lu (right)
Take a good look at the death, dismemberment and carnage this POS caused. This is what you are calling innocent? UNREAL. Maybe if you had actually known anyone that was killed or injured you might think differently. Then again, thinking would require a brain, which does not seem present in any of you.
This love is terrifying.
Thousands of American teen girls are crushing on Boston Marathon bomber Dzhokhar “Jahar” Tsarnaev, 19 — and leading a social-media movement to exonerate him.
The swooning teens will not accept allegations that the bushy-haired college kid — whom they refer to by his nickname, “Jahar” — and his brother, Tamerlan, 26, killed three and maimed hundreds by setting off bombs at the April 15 race and killed an MIT police officer during the ensuing manhunt.
While some scrawl the hashtag “#FreeJahar” on their hands with markers, an 18-year-old in Topeka, Kansas, is going to the extreme — she wants the Dzhokhar’s words inked on her arm forever.
“Getting one of Jahar’s tweets tattooed on me tomorrow. Guess you could say I’m a #FreeJahar supporter,” “@keepitbluntedd” tweeted on May 7.
The tatted-up teen, Alisha, told The Post she’d soon put Tsarnaev’s April 7 tweet on her upper inside of her arm. It will read, “If you have the knowledge and the inspiration all that’s left is to take action.”
WHO POLITICIZED BENGHAZI AND THE DEATH OF FOUR AMERICANS?
The Audacity of
Hope Barack Obama. The Obama Administration and their minions are some of the most vile that 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue has ever seen. After ABC News had exposed the Benghazi talking points had been edited 12 times to the point where they did not even reflect the truth as to what happened … during their damage control, the Obama spin machine and chief Obama mouthpiece Jay Carney tried to blame it all on Mitt Romney. How pathetic are these people? Who politicized Benghazi and the death of Ambassador Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods? It was the Obama administration who as even MSNBC and CNN are reporting edited the talking points for political purposes during a reelection campaign. MSNBC is even going as far as discussing impeachment as a result of the Obama administrations actions. This administration lied and scrubbed the Benghazi talking points to get reelected and they have the gall to say others politicized Benghazi? Families, friend and Americans want answers to what happened and the Obama administration continues to misrepresent the truth.
But with President Obama, the buck always stops with some one else.
CNN’s Gloria Borger Acknowldges Benghazi Talking Points “Were Edited to the Point of Inaccuracy” … Chris Cuomo: “Safe to Say this Goes Beyond Partisan Picking”
Add another Left-leaning main stream media outlet to those that are questioning the Barack Obama administration and the edited Benghazi terror attack talking points.
First MSNBC and now CNN is coming out against the Obama administration for editing the Benghazi talking points, in the aftermath of the terror attack that left four Americans dead, to the point where the events that took place were untrue. In a CNN interview between Chris Cuomo and Chief political analyst Gloria Borger, neither had anything good to say about the 12 edited versions of the Benghazi talking points using such words as “cover-up” and “whitewash”. Gloria Borger said, the Obama Administration’s Benghazi talking points were “edited to the point of inaccuracy” and the question is “was it a cover-up or whitewash”. She would later say that the talking points were so edited that by the end, they did not even resemble the truth. The most amazing comment may have come from Chris Cuomo when he stated, “it’s safe to say that this goes beyond partisan picking.” Did the LEFT just hear that? One of your own is saying that the GOP is not acting in a partisan manner. CNN is basically saying that the Obama administration played partisan politics for his reelection bid when four Americans died. Are you kidding, Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, Glen Doherty and Tyrone S. Woods were killed by terrorist and the Obama WH edited what occurred to the point it was a false narrative. We lost lives and needed to know what happened and Team Obama was more interested in talking points that fit his reelection. Cuomo called it unforgivable.
Maybe former Arkansas Governor Mike Hukabee was correct when he said during his radio show, President Obama “will not fill out his full term” because he was complicit in a “cover-up” surrounding the attack that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans in Benghazi, Libya.
GLORIA BORGER: What we see in this process is that these talking points were edited to the point of inaccuracy. The question is, is it a cover-up? Is it a whitewash? We don’t know the answer to that.
CHRIS CUOMO: I know. And you took my question. That’s exactly what I was going to ask you. Right? Because that’s what this gets to, 12. What’s the context? It sounds like a lot, but we have to know the nature and purpose of what those changes were.
GLORIA BORGER: So here’s the context. Over at the CIA they’re looking at some of these points, which include mention of Al Qaeda. And there’s a sense from some at the CIA, you know what, we don’t want to tip anybody that we’re investigating Al Qaeda on this, so let’s take out some of the references to Al Qaeda. What the CIA left in, apparently, was this sort of broader context of Al Qaeda in Benghazi in that part of the world. Those were eventually edited out. And there is an e-mail obtained by ABC news from someone at the State Department which asks, why should we leave that in because “it could be abused by members of Congress to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings.” So clearly from a State Department official asking the question, why are we going to give members of Congress information, don’t forget in an election year, which they could turn around and beat us up with. And that’s how you see in evolving. Everybody’s got a different reason for editing it. And they edit it down to something that’s totally, turns out to be in fact untrue.
More from MSNBC … Benghazi Scandal Makes White House “Look Terrible,” Possibly An “Impeachment Issue”.
Bad Day for Obama & Hillary Clinton: MSNBC Guest from the Daily Beast Columnist Michael Tomasky Says … Invoked “That Word That Starts With ‘I’” … Benghazi Scandal Makes White House “Look Terrible,” Possibly An “Impeachment Issue”
You know its bad for Barack Obama when the LIBS at
MSNBS MSLSD MSNBC start bringing up “Impeachment” as a result of their Benghazi cover-up and Benghazigate.
Even the LEFT is at a loss for words and defense when it comes to the way the Obama White House has handled Benghazi before, during and after the Benghazi consulate attacks. The news that Benghazi talking points had been edited 12 times and scrubbed of all references of terrorism have left the LEFT in a quandary. Just when you thought you had seen it all, even the ultra-liberal MSNBC folks appear to be using the “I” word when it comes to President Barack Obama and “impeachment” over the White House’s handling of the aftermath of the Benghazi terror attacks that left four Americans dead, including US Ambassador Chris Stevens. Playing politics games to win the 2012 presidential election, could come back to bite Obama. MSNBC, that has made a living off of defending, deflecting and just not covering Barack Obama’s disastrous presidency, both foreign and domestic, has now been forced to question the Obama presidency and even use such descriptive words as impeachment and compare his handling of Benghazi to ‘Watergate”. As Maggie’s Farm states, this is beginning to look much worse than “Watergate”. In fact, it is. No US ambassadors died during Watergate. Actually, no one died during Watergate, only political careers.
Unlike Watergate, an unremarkable political dirty trick with a dumb and unnecessary White House cover-up (if a handful of people had been fired it would have been a big nothing), in this case American public servants died seemingly because of State Dept and possibly White House incompetence or indifference, and both may have been complicit in an attempted cover-up a few weeks before a national election. Possibly the CIA too. People have been intimidated about speaking out, but maybe no longer.
It is not joust Barack Obama who is in trouble, but so is former Secretary of State and 2016 Democrat presidential nominee wannbe Hillary Clinton. She comes across looking terrible, possibly even worse than Obama. As Washington Post reporter Nia-Malika Henderson said, “I think, for Clinton, it looks Clintonian.” Yes she does. Hillary looks like all the worst parts of the Bill Clinton years, something that will not be lost by the GOP or Democrat primary challengers in 2016. The politicization of talking points when four Americans died is beyond disgustingly sick. Before, during and after, Clinton’s State Department failed miserably and looked to cover up … is that what the US needs as a president in 2016?
“This is quite the window into what is usually the hush-hush process about how to deal with these types of attacks and the spin that irrevocably comes afterwards,” NBC reporter Luke Russert opined.
“This is not good for the White House right now,” Russert said to BuzzFeed editor Ben Smith. “Does it stick?”
“Well, sure,” Smith replied. “They look terrible.”
Smith said that the emails indicate that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have been directly involved in the process of “scrubbing” references to Islamic terrorism from her department’s talking points.
“Does this become then an election politics thing?” Russert asked. He said that the Republican Party has been trying to link Clinton to the Benghazi scandal for some time.
The Daily Beast columnist Michael Tomasky said it does. He invoked “that word that starts with ‘I’” to describe the potentially significant political fallout that could result from the Benghazi scandal.
“It becomes a potentially impeachment issue as long as the Republicans are in control of the House,” Tomasky added.
“I think, for Clinton, it looks Clintonian,” submitted Washington Post reporter Nia-Malika Henderson. “It also, I think, reminds us that there is only one person that the far right-wing hates more than Obama, and that’s Hillary Clinton.”
Beghazi-Gate: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions … Scrubbed of Terror & Al-Qaeda Reference … Obama White House Initially Said Only One Word was Edited
BENGHAZIGATE = WATERGATE … File this one under better late media investigation than never. It is obvious that Benghazi was one big Obama administration lie for political convenience because of the 2012 Presidential election.
Remember when the Obama White House and their mouth piece minions like Susan Rice came out after the attack on the Benghazi consulate that resulted in the death of four American including Ambassador Stevens and blamed it on a video tape? Of course any normal, common sense thinking person knew that was BS at the time and it was later proved to be complete BS. Benghazi “whistle-blower” witness Greg Hicks stated in from of Congressional hearings this week … “I Was Stunned. My Jaw Dropped. I Was Embarrassed.” The Obama White House said that they relied entirely on CIA talking points. NOT SO FAST … ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show that they were dramatically edited and scrubbed by the Obama Administration. The initial CIA talking point draft to the final one used by the White House and distributed to Congress was scrubbed of all references to terrorism, Al-Qaeda. The story goes on to say, in an email to officials at the White House and the intelligence agencies, State Department spokesman Victoria Nuland took issue with including that information because it “could be abused by members [of Congress] to beat up the State Department for not paying attention to warnings, so why would we want to feed that either? So Hillary Clinton’s spokesperson wanted to sanitize the talking points so the State department did not looks incompetent and derelict in their duty? Who thinks that Secretary of State was not aware of these changes? Seriously America … the 2016 wanna be Democrat frontrunner candidate knew it all.
So where would the directive come from to scrub the references to terrorism to a talking point of a terror attack just months before the 2012 Presidential election? Who was “The One” who’s narrative was Al-Qaeda was on pat to defeat and Bin Laden is dead (VIDEO)?
Click on pic to watch the ABC News VIDEO
ABC News has obtained 12 different versions of the talking points that show they were extensively edited as they evolved from the drafts first written entirely by the CIA to the final version distributed to Congress and to U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice before she appeared on five talk shows the Sunday after that attack.
White House emails reviewed by ABC News suggest the edits were made with extensive input from the State Department. The edits included requests from the State Department that references to the Al Qaeda-affiliated group Ansar al-Sharia be deleted as well references to CIA warnings about terrorist threats in Benghazi in the months preceding the attack.
That would appear to directly contradict what White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said about the talking points in November.
“Those talking points originated from the intelligence community. They reflect the IC’s best assessments of what they thought had happened,” Carney told reporters at the White House press briefing on November 28, 2012. “The White House and the State Department have made clear that the single adjustment that was made to those talking points by either of those two institutions were changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility’ because ‘consulate’ was inaccurate.”
Hmm, this is a far cry from the “only one word was edited” from the talking points spewed by Obama White House spokesman, Jay Carney. The White House has denied accusations that they mislead the American public and did not mischaracterize the White House and State Department’s role in developing of talking points regarding the attack on the American diplomatic post in Benghazi. Who are you going to believe America, Obama’s chief spin-meister Jay Carney, or your lying eyes and ears?
Carney on Friday was responding to an ABC News report that the talking points given to U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice about Benghazi underwent 12 rounds of revisions with extensive input from the State Department, seemingly contradicting Carney’s claims in November.
During a White House briefing then, Carney said that the talking points “originated from the intelligence community” and the only adjustment from the White House and State Department was “changing the word ‘consulate’ to ‘diplomatic facility.’”