Skip to comments.FBI will not prosecute bombing of government building bombing with IED as terrorism
Posted on 12/03/2012 2:14:51 PM PST by combat_boots
FBI will not prosecute bombing of government building bombing with IED as terrorism due to "political sensitivities"
This is as bad as the actual bombing. Afraid of violating the sharia and offending the feelings of jihadists, the FBI will not be prosecuting the bombing of a government building with an IED as terror due to "political sensitivities." It just gets worse and worse. Muslim bombs government office in Arizona
Iraqi refugee arrested for bombing Arizona Social Security office with IED PJ Media, Patrick Poole via Free Republic UPDATED (8:25p EDT): I just spoke again with my contact in the FBI Phoenix field office (who is not authorized to speak on behalf of the FBI office) that it is highly unlikely that Aldosary will be charged with any terrorism offense. While they are internally treating it like a domestic terrorism investigation, including looking at if he had any help constructing the explosive device, the FBI is saying very little and and will prosecute this as a simple explosives and arson case because of the political sensitivities involved. Original Post: The typically quiet town of Casa Grande, Arizona was rocked by an explosion at the local Social Security Administration office early Friday morning by what appears to an improvised explosive device (IED). No one was hurt in the explosion, which occurred shortly before the office was scheduled to open. The explosion was reportedly heard and felt all over the area." />
Only Timothy McVeigh types can be terrorists.
TRANSLATION: One of 0bama's muzzie bros just doin' what ragheads do!
So charge him with the crime of Jihad.
Can’t be having no terrorist attack on obama’s watch, now can we?
Of course not. He was probably just justifiably upset over a horrible anti-Islam video on Youtube. I think it's time for Obama to reiterate his apologies for allowing such a video to be created in this bad, bad country.
Exactly what I was thinking.
Obama can’t have it said that Bush was better at preventing terrorism than Mr. Lead from Behind.
Yes, to prosecute them would offend Muslims.
Ft. Hood redux.
lemme guess....he will be charged with Possession of a Device Not in Compliance With Consumer Product Safety Commission Regulations”?
This is the New Progressive America where DC actually sponsors and supports Islamic Terrorist attacks throughout the Middle East (Syria) and North Africa (Libya). So how in the world could they call the same Islamic extremist they are are employing in the Middle East and North Africa, terrorists ?
See the precedent that Ft. Hood set? If that can’t be called terrorism, how could this possibly be?/sarc. Effing no good rotten political sensibilties be damned. This is jihad, plain and simple.
“I will stand with the moslems....”
I really can’t write more. To say this is dereliction of duty presupposes a sense of duty.
Have you noticed that the only ‘terrorist’ attacks we have had are the ones our esteemed fbi have set up so they could ‘prevent’ them?
>>FBI will not prosecute bombing of government building bombing with IED as terrorism due to “political sensitivities”>>
The CIA investigates and the FBI sues. They got Petraeus out as head of the CIA, and now have taken over the FBI.
I wonder if illegal voting will be considered as “too sensitive” to arrest the illegal voters.
Sorry, but the FBI does not prosecute anyone. The U.S. Attorneys of the U.S. Department of (In)Justice choose to prosecute or not to prosecute. The FBI are simply a federal police force. Nothing more, nothing less than a bunch of flat-footed doofuses unlike what you see on television shows like “Criminal Minds”.
It’s gonna be a Long, Long, 4 Years!!
Holder will get right on it........ right? RIIIGGGHHHHT!
I stand corrected about the FBI suing. Thanks for the information.
Of course not, it calls into question some seriously bad longstanding policies.
From the story I read last night it sounds like he was here since the first gulf war.
Something *may* be wrong with this case. The descriptions of the guy almost seem like two different people.
To start with, some were saying that he was a legitimate refugee who was thrilled with being in the US, did not go to a mosque, and was not an observant Muslim.
However, he did serve a sentence four years ago for aggravated harassment of his former employer, and worked as a day laborer at the SS office. In addition, he is currently facing assault and disorderly conducted charges in a separate case in Casa Grande.
So while he fits the profile of a hothead with anger issues, it might actually *not* be terrorism.
FBI will not prosecute bombing of government building bombing with IED as terrorism due to “political sensitivities”
wtf is it going to take to be a terrorist attack.
I have nothing but hate for the scumbags who voted to keep this country on its current path of destruction. I wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire.
believers in the Constitution
‘extremist’ religion followers
Odinissts or Asatruists
“Dress may include a shaved head or very short hair, the report states, jeans, thin suspenders, combat boots or Doc Martens, a bomber jacket, and tattoos... (of Nazi-like emblems, but let’s not quibble).
What political sensitivities? Sensitive toward whom?
Probably one of the many muzzie sleeper agents. 0bama’s plan to bring the GITMO prisoners to US prisons would allow them to spread the jihad propaganda to numerous prisoners who then are paroled and go out to establish more sleeper cells.
Again, guy appears to have been brought to America during the first gulf war.
Its time to face reality.
Why was McVeigh a “terrorist”, but this guy isn’t, and what are the FBI estimates of the number of “terrorists” out there that are waiting to kill us?
That sounds about right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.