Current events, politics and life in general from the perspective of a conservative woman in New York
I knew this would happen sooner or later, as those Tsarnaev brothers had to have had help. The three individuals have been arrested for making false statements to investigators, and obstruction of justice.
(CNN) — At least two of three additional suspects arrested Wednesday in the Boston Marathon bombing probe face obstruction of justice charges, a federal law enforcement source said.
Boston police announced the arrests Wednesday morning, adding that there was “no threat to the public.”
Two students from New Bedford, Massachusetts, have been arrested on charges of making false statements to investigators and conspiracy to obstruct justice, according to a federal law enforcement source with firsthand knowledge of the investigation.
The students are originally from Kazakhstan and were already in custody on immigration charges, according to another source with knowledge of the immigration case. The third is a U.S. citizen, the federal law enforcement source said.
The students who now face charges went to college with Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, the source familiar with the immigration case said.
Now I want to know when we’re going to stop immigration from these Muslim countries where their people are taught to blame America for all their problems?
She’s now whining about how “America took my kids away from me.”
MAKHACHKALA, Russia (CBS/AP) — The mother of the two Boston bombing suspects told reporters that “America took my kids away from me” and wished she had never left Russia.
I wish you’d never left Russia either.
“Why did I even go there?” Zubeidat Tsarnaeva said, crying, after CBS News correspondent Charlie D’Agata asked if she regretted the move.
Why did our government let this trash in to begin with? Remember, this is a family that mooched off of American taxpayers. This woman also shoplifted over $1,600 worth of clothing from Lord & Taylor
The mother told reporters at that same press conference that she would be “happy” to give up her U.S. citizenship, and that she was “thinking about it.”
The Tsarnaev family emigrated to the U.S. a decade ago, but both parents returned to Russia last year.
Speaking of giving up U.S. citizenship, I think it’s about time we make it legal to strip the citizenship of (at least) naturalized individuals who commit heinous terrorist crimes.
Citing “privacy” rights of dead terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev, the administration of Governor Deval Patrick is refusing to release records on what kind of government benefits the oldest brother was receiving.
I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, being that this is a state whose residents saw fit to repeatedly send Ted Kennedy and John Kerry to the Senate.
The Patrick administration clamped down the lid yesterday on Herald requests for details of Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s government benefits, citing the dead terror mastermind’s right to privacy.
Across the board, state agencies flatly refused to provide information about the taxpayer-funded lifestyle for the 26-year-old man and his brother and accused accomplice Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, 19.
On EBT card status or spending, state welfare spokesman Alec Loftus would only say Tamerlan Tsarnaev, his wife and 3-year-old daughter received benefits that ended in 2012. He declined further comment.
On unemployment compensation, labor department spokesman Kevin Franck refused to say whether Tamerlan Tsarnaev ever collected, saying it was “confidential and not a matter of public record.”
On Dzhokhar Tsarnaev’s college aid, University of Massachusetts Dartmouth spokesman Robert Connolly said, “It is our position — and I believe the accepted position in higher education — that student records including academic records and financial records (including financial aid) cannot under federal law be released without a student’s consent.”
On cellphones, the Federal Communications Commission would not say whether either brother had a government-paid cellphone, also citing privacy laws.
On housing, Cambridge officials and the family’s landlord ducked questions on whether the brothers were ever on Section 8 assistance.
The Herald reported yesterday that Tamerlan Tsarnaev, his wife and 3-year-old daughter collected welfare until 2012 and that both Tamerlan and Dzhokhar received benefits through their parents “for a limited portion” of the time after they came to the U.S., which was around 2002.
However, the Department of Transitional Assistance wouldn’t release information about how long or how much they received.
The administration was slammed by a Democratic congressman who insisted the public has a right to know how taxpayers were underwriting the accused jihadist Tsarnaevs.
“It’s certainly relevant information that should be made public,” U.S. Rep. Stephen F. Lynch told the Herald. “There’s a national security interest No. 1. Secondly, there’s also a public interest in finding out whether these individuals were able to exploit the system and get benefits they weren’t entitled to.”
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev lies hospitalized and facing capital charges that include using a weapon of mass destruction that killed three people and injured 260 near the Boston Marathon finish line.
Taxpayers — already on the hook for Tsarnaev’s court-appointed attorneys in the terror plot — continue to pay his mounting medical bills at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.
The public also paid for Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s attorney when the Russian national successfully fought criminal charges in 2009 that he battered a former girlfriend.
I especially liked these comments:
You can’t make this crap up… Not only does deval willfully welcome the illegal invasion of foreign nationals into this state, support them financially and put their rights ahead of their citizens, that he now believes that a dead terrorist should be afforded more rights and privacy than the citizens they tried to kill, and now it appears that his lemmings like you tb agree with him. So you apparently believe the rights of terrorists supersede the rights of their victim as well. . . . . . I bet a rape victim, having every single and trivial aspect of her life exposed and destroyed by some scumbag defense attorney would like to be afforded those same privileges…
This is looking more and more like a massive cover to protect the Democratic party. This kid is in the hospital all drugged up on pain killers and barely able to speak. A judge mysteriously appears to read him his Miranda rights during FBI questioning to shut him up before the truth comes out. That doesn’t look good. Obama and Napolitano have failed in homeland security. She should resign immediately. Deval is protecting his reputation for his presidential aspirations in 2016. Very pathetic. Now the welfare benefits are the nail in the coffin and a slap in the face for the victims of April 15th and the hard working taxpayers of this state. These lowlifes lost their right to privacy the second the first bomb exploded. Revoke the citizenship of the younger brother. He obviously took the oath of citizenship under false pretenses. Open the welfare records!!! Let see how badly we are getting jipped. Also, we should have a recall election for governor. Deval is not looking out for our security and should be removed ASAP.
Living off are tax money and yet he can afford to go to Russia for 6 months ? You bet they some splainin to do.The terrorist are literally mocking you to death Progressives.What a freakin travesty.From the white house to the Senate to beacon hill,nothing but lies and cover ups.
It’s bad enough that America allows in people from backwards countries who hate the country that (foolishly) welcomed them in. Yet these ingrates have no qualms about mooching off American taxpayers once they get here.
US-hating terrorist Tamerlan Tsarnaev took government handouts even as he delved deep into the world of violent, radical Islam, officials said.
Tsarnaev, his wife Katherine Russell and their 3-year-old daughter were on the state dole as recently as 2012, officials with the state’s Office of Health and Human Services told the Boston Herald.
The dead Boston Marathon bomber and his family stopped receiving benefits because his hard-working wife, toiling for up 80 hours a week, brought home enough bread to make them ineligible for government assistance.
The home health-care aide supported her deadbeat husband, who stayed at home with the child.
Tsarnaev’s younger brother, bombing suspect Dzhokar, and their parents also received benefits when they were younger.
On another note, I don’t believe for a minute that the late Tamerlan was being a stay at home dad. Knowing what we know now, I think it’s more logical to conclude that he was just being a deadbeat who only cared about jihad. And what kind of “man” (a term I use very loosely) would make his wife leave her small child to work long hours while he sat around all day doing practically nothing, except becoming more and more of a fanatic? The fact that Katherine Russell would even agree to such an arrangement only goes to show how she cared only about her vagina above all else.
Finally, I believe that wife had to know what her deadbeat husband was up to.
Unfortunately, America learned nothing from 9/11. Thanks to the ineptness and political correctness of our government bureaucrats, we have four dead Americans, and over a hundred people wounded. And now we learn that Russia repeatedly warned the FBI (and CIA according to CNN last night) about the older brother Tamerlan Tsarnaev. The incompetent FBI interviewed him but found nothing. And his name was entered into some databases.
Sources said Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s details were entered into TIDE, a database maintained by the National Counterterrorism Center, because the FBI spoke to him in 2011 while investigating a Russian tip-off that he had become a follower of radical Islamists.
The FBI found nothing to suggest he was an active threat, but all the same placed his name on the ‘Terrorist Identities Datamart Environment’ list. The FBI has not said what it did find about Tsarnaev.
But the database, which holds more than half a million names, is only a repository of information on people who U.S. authorities see as known, suspected or potential terrorists from around the world.
Because of its huge size, U.S. investigators do not routinely monitor everyone registered there, said U.S. officials familiar with the database.
Now just out of curiosity, why are people listed in terrorist databases even allowed to be in America in the first place? Why are the snivel-rights of these people, many of who detest America, more important than the safety and well being of lawful productive American citizens? Is it more important for government bureaucrats to have a job entering names while they pretend to keep Americans safe? Or is it still because we don’t want to be seen as “mean” and racist?
After being put in the TIDE system, his name was entered in another database, this one maintained by the Homeland Security Department’s Customs and Border Protection bureau which is used to screen people crossing U.S. land borders and entering at airports or by sea.
Tsarnaev was flagged on that database when he left the United States for Russia in January 2012 but no alarm was raised, presumably because the FBI had not identified him as a threat after the interview.
When he returned from Russia six months later, he had already been automatically downgraded in the border database because there was no new information that required him to continue to get extra attention. So he did not get secondary inspection on his re-entry at New York’s JFK Airport. It was unclear exactly what the procedure was for such a downgrade.
WHY DOES ANYONE NEED AN AR-15?
02-17-2013 10:16 am – Joseph Farah – World Net Daily
Have you noticed how gun-control advocates are asking all the wrong questions in their desperation to disarm American citizens?
This is one you will hear frequently from non-Americans like Piers Morgan of CNN. He recently asked it of Ted Nugent. (What a mistake that was!)
The question goes something like this: “Why does anyone need an AR-15?”
Now I can tell you lots of reasons why people need AR-15s. I may not absolutely need one. But I’d sure like to have one – maybe more than one.
But there really are people throughout the world and throughout the United States who have needed them.
Let me make this simple for the Piers Morgans of the world. Let’s say you are the victim of a home invasion. It happens every day in America, by the way. A group of armed thugs decide to select your home for an attack. Their plan is to ransack the house looking for money, jewelry, artwork, drugs, whatever. The gang has no compunction about killing you and other members of your family if you become an obstacle to their plan.
You find yourself outmanned, but, if you have an AR-15, you might not find yourself outgunned.
It’s just that simple. Why is this difficult for people like Piers Morgan to understand? I understand why Barack Obama and other would-be government tyrants want to disarm the citizenry. That’s about establishing a monopoly on force. Governments throughout the world have been doing it since the beginning of time.
Genocides have been perpetrated around the world only when the citizenry is disarmed. It’s not even possible to commit such monstrous acts among a well-armed populace.
But there’s more to this question than meets the eye.
Look at the question again – this time with emphasis on the key word: “Why does anyone need an AR-15?”
The keyword is “need.”
This is the word that betrays the motivations of the non-government advocates of gun confiscation.
What do they have in common? At the foundation, they are socialists. They don’t really believe in private property. They believe in Karl Marx’s philosophy: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.” That was a slogan Marx popularized in 1875. Today, 138 years later, it still resonates in the hearts and minds of people all over the world – many of them unaware of its origin.
Notice the word “need” in that statement.
Socialists believe the entire society should be oriented to meeting people’s “needs,” with the government determining what those “needs” are.
Think about it this way: How would you like it if the government asked you the following questions:
“Do you really need that spare bedroom?”
“Do you really need that Big Gulp?”
“Do you really need that Big Mac?”
“Do you really need that expensive cigar?”
“Do you really need that second car?
Of course, as you know, governments are already asking some of these questions.
What it comes down to for them is this: If you don’t need it, you don’t get it.
You will notice they never ask some other questions about “need.”
One obvious one is: “Do you really need that abortion?”
They won’t ask that question because killing unborn babies is the sacrament of the new socialist religion. Actually, there’s nothing really new about it. Evil societies have been sacrificing children for thousands of years. In America, they are sacrificed to the false god of “choice.”
“Choice” is actually a wonderful thing in a free society. But “choice” has been hijacked by evil people as a euphemism for doing what seems convenient, expedient, taking the easy way out, shirking responsibility.
Socialists aren’t for choice. They are for determining what you can have based on “need.”
That’s why I’m pro-choice on guns and pro-life on abortion.
First off, I’m all for teachers and other school personnel being armed if they choose to do so, as this blogger recently suggested. I’m also in favor of retired military vets and police officers guarding our schools.
But now, the uncle of one of the slain Sandy Hook children has come out with some excellent suggestions on how to prevent guns from getting in the hands of violent, mentally unstable people.
Lawyer Alexis Haller is the uncle of Noah Pozner, who was killed by Adam Lanza in Newtown, CT last month. Haller recently flew from his home in Seattle to Washington, D.C. to make his case for a series of plans designed to prevent future mass shootings.
Unlike other proposals currently on the table, Haller is not seeking to ban anything. His idea covers everything from before a shooting happens to the grief counseling needed after the fact.
At the core of Haller’s proposal are two new laws. First, he recommends a mandatory reporting law which would require anyone with knowledge of an impending crime involving guns or bombs to notify authorities within 24 hours.
In his written justification for the proposal, Haller notes that mass shootings are rarely spontaneous events. They often involve premeditated planning; according to the government report issued after Columbine, “Most attackers engaged in some behavior prior to the incident that caused others concern or indicated a need for help.”
His other recommendation is a “Firearm Safekeeping Law” which would make it a misdemeanor, or possibly a felony, to store guns in such a way that they could fall into the hands of someone with a mental illness. The proposed law is written so that it only applies in a case where a mentally ill or violent person actually does obtain the weapon, not where they merely could have.
Haller’s proposal defines mental illness as “a person who: (1) has undergone treatment for or been diagnosed with a mental illness or neurodevelopmental disorder and (2) is reasonably believed to pose a danger to others.”
Failure to secure a weapon is punished based on the results. If the unsecured weapon is obtained by a mentally ill person, the owner could be charged with a misdemeanor. If the mentally ill person who obtains it discharges the weapon, the owner would be subject to a felony charge.
Newly published information indicates that Adam Lanza’s mother kept her legally obtained gun collection in an unlocked closet in her home, despite her concern that Adam Lanza needed psychological help. The easy access to these weapons made it possible for Lanza to get the guns of his choice, kill his mother while she slept, and then commit the massacre at Sandy Hook.
Haller argues that, had she lived, Lanza’s mother “should have been subject to criminal prosecution and civil liability” for her failure to secure her weapons away from her son.
In America today, most law-abiding American citizens who happen to live in any Democrat controlled urban area of this country, are being denied their constitutional right to defend themselves with a gun. The people living in these areas, from all races and ethnic backgrounds, men and women, gay and straight, have been subjected to gun control restrictions passed by local Democratic “progressive” administrations over many years that are specifically designed to keep them under control on the new 21st century urban plantations, without the rights that citizens in other parts of the country currently enjoy.
We have only to look to Chicago, Illinois, a showplace of the 21st century Democrat-controlled plantation, to see the effects of the most restrictive gun control legislation in the country that has completely disarmed the law abiding citizens in that city. Mayor Ron Emanuel (D), a gun control activist, likes to compare his city to other so-called world class ‘Alpha cities.’ Well, let us see how Chicago does compare. Chicago has the highest murder rate of any Alpha City in the world, yes – in the world (19.4 per 100,000) — higher even than the Third World cities of Mexico City (8.0), Sao Paolo, Brazil (15.6) and Moscow (9.6). Apparently, strict gun control does not work in Chicago.
If Chicago isn’t proof enough that gun-control legislation does not work, maybe those pushing for stricter gun control laws can learn a little from history.
In 1929, the communist Soviet Union established gun control and from 1929 to 1953, about 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up under the leadership of Joseph Stalin and exterminated by their own government.
In 1935, China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated by their own communist government, under Mao Tse-Tung.
Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, under the leadership of communist Pol Pot, one million ‘educated’ people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated by their own government.
In 1938, the National Socialist (Nazi) government of Germany under Adolph Hitler enacted the nationwide German Weapons Act that replaced the Law on Firearms and Ammunition of 1928. The Nazis had inherited “registration lists” of firearm owners and their firearms when they ‘lawfully’ took over in March 1933 and used these lists in 1938 to seize the privately held firearms from persons who were “not reliable” like the Jews and other enemies of the government.
Nazi’s are often portrayed by the left in America as being on the extreme right, when in fact, the real name of the Nazi Party was the National Socialist Party. They were the extreme liberal “Progressives” of their time in Germany. When they finally took power, they passed laws to eventually restrict gun ownership to Nazi party members and other “reliable” people. From 1939 to 1945, a total of 6 million Jews and 7 million other people, mostly Christians, who were unable to defend themselves because they had no guns, were rounded up and exterminated by the left-wing National Socialist government (Nazis).
Justifying the confiscation of firearms from the “unreliable people, Adolph Hitler, in his Edict (similar to an executive order of a U.S. President) of March 18, 1939, said:
“History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subjected peoples to carry arms have prepared their own fall.”
American citizens in 2013 who happen to disagree with the implementation of expanding socialist programs in the USA or who resist attacks of their Second Amendment Rights, whether they are members of the so-called tea party, OathKeepers, or just plain citizens, are often called “right-wing extremists,” “Nazi’s” or “Facist’s” when in fact the Nazis and Facists were socialists and on the far left of the political spectrum, not the right.
In Italy, when the Facist movement was founded in 1919, most of its leaders, like Mussolini, were Marxists and radical leftists who were followers of the revolutionary doctrines of a leftist revolutionary named George Sorel. The Facists called themselves ‘revolutionary nationalists’ and there was nothing conservative about them. After he took power, Mussolini also outlawed the possession of guns by the people and confiscated millions of weapons to insure that the people were powerless to resist his socialist government.
All in all, in the 20th century, a total of 56 million people were rounded up and exterminated by their communist-socialist governments because of gun control. Had they not been able to initially legally impose some strict gun-control on their people, these communist-socialist governments would not have been able to kill so many millions of their own people.
In 1968, the U.S. Congress passed the Gun Control Act of 1968 hat was later found to be based almost entirely, word for word, on the German Weapons Act of 1938. Apparently, then Senator Thomas J. Dodd (D-CT) had obtained a copy of the Nazi Weapons Law (in German) and had it translated into English by the Library of Congress in July of 1968, before submitting the bill in the Senate.
When it came to disarming those “non-reliable people” (Jews and others) in Germany, the Nazis had proven their skills. If Senator Dodd was looking for a model for disarming those “non-reliable people” in America, he found the German Weapons Law of 1938 as a good blueprint. Gun control has always been about “people control.” It shouldn’t be surprising that a totalitarian regime like the National Socialist regime of Adolph Hitler’s Germany could offer plenty of great suggestions on the subject to their fellow Socialists in America.
Politicians of the left in America have been trying to take our guns away for over 100 years and nothing has changed as you can see from the following quotes from some of America’s socialists posing as Democrats:
“Our task of creating a Socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.” Sarah Brady, Chairman, Handgun Control Inc.[ Source: The National Educator, January 1994, Pg.3
“We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…” Bill Clinton, USA Today, 11 March 1993, pg. 2a
“Waiting periods are only a step. Gun Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal.” Former Attorney General Janet Reno, 10 Dec 1993.
“What good does it do to ban just some guns. All guns should be banned.” Senator Howard Metzanbaum (D-OH)
Senator Dianne Feinstein: “If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United States for an out-right ban, picking up every one of them……., I would have done it. I could not do that. The votes weren’t here.” CBS-TV’s “60 Minutes”, February 5, 1995.
It’s easy to see that the modern progressive socialists in the United States are showing their true colors and they are now more aligned with ideals of the socialist dictators like Adolph Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung and Pol Pot, than they are with the American people.
Isn’t it ironic that all the socialists in the media, Hollywood and in various level of government who are calling for stricter gun laws all have either armed private security guards and services available to them, or have armed government agents and police protecting them. Our Mayors are protected by people with guns; our Governors are protected by people with guns; members of the House, Senate and the President, are protected by a lot of people with guns; our judges, courts and government buildings are protected by people with guns as are the corporate CEO’s and the Billionaire socialists.
It’s not that the American socialists want to ban all guns in America. No, they just want to ban those guns owned by those that Adolph Hitler called the “not reliable people.” That means the average Americans like you and I. The President, Senator Feinstein, Mayors Blumberg and Ron Emanuel, the Hollywood elite, corporate executives, and all high ranking government officials will still have their guns. Only the average American citizens will be disarmed and defenseless.
What do the socialists base their position on? Well, not the facts. That’s for sure.
In 2011, there were 14,748 murders in the United States. Rifles were used on only 352 of these murders. More people were murdered with knives, with blunt weapons like baseball bats and tire irons, or beaten to death with hands and feet, than were killed with rifles. Assault rifles are used so infrequently in homicides that many police departments almost never see them; in 2011, there were nine states that did not have a single murder committed with any rifle.
Obama’s goons in the media have pretty much declared war on legal American gun owners by publishing their names, addresses and the types of guns they own. First there was the Journal News, which is a Gannett publication. Now Gawker Media has published the names of legal gun owners in New York City.
Last month, the Journal News sparked a firestorm of protest when it published a mappable database of every licensed gun owner in Westchester and Rockland counties, north of New York City. The paper obtained the data—which New York state law explicitly and unambiguously demands be made public—through open records requests. The reaction was swift and furious—gun rights and privacy advocates published the names and addresses of the paper’s editors in retaliation, and the paper (ironically) hired armed guards to protect against threats.
Below is a 446-page list of every licensed gun owner in New York City. I obtained it from the NYPD two-and-a-half years ago via a Freedom of Information Law request. Because the NYPD is more interested in raping and/or eating ladies and spying on Muslims than it is in honoring public records law, the list contains only the names, and not the addresses, of the licensees. (If you’re curious, here’s what section 400.00 of the Penal Law of New York, entitled “Licenses to carry, possess, repair and dispose of firearms,” has to say on the matter: “The name and address of any person to whom an application for any license has been granted shall be a public record.” The only way to get the associated addresses from the NYPD, as the law requires, would be to take them to court, which no one has apparently done.)
OK people the editor of this hit piece is one John J. Cook. Here’s his address and phone number:
528 16th st. Apt #2
Brooklyn N.Y. 11215-5912
Here’s a picture of Cook with his two cute kids, which is his Twitter profile picture, by the way.
Pay back’s a bitch, isn’t it?