Skip to comments.U.N. Leader: U.S. ‘Israel First Ethos’ to Blame for Boston Bombing
Posted on 04/24/2013 5:57:07 AM PDT by SJackson
While our nation continues to deal with the aftermath of the Boston Marathon terrorist bombings, which killed three people and wounded more than 260, jihadists and their sympathizers gloat, rationalize or turn the blame for the bombings back onto the United States and Israel. Leftists, who were so quick to accuse Tea Party members or right wingers for the bombings, have remained mostly silent as the truth of the Islamist roots of the bombing suspects became known.
The suspects, Tamerlan Tsarnaev, now dead, and his younger brother, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, now in custody, were described by one U.S. government official as aspiring jihadists. They were led to their alleged evil act by their understanding of their Muslim faith. Tellingly, on the Russian social networking site Vkontakte, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev described his world view as Islam.
They reportedly turned to Inspire magazine, an English-language online magazine published by Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, for bomb-building instructions.
Dzhokhar Tsarnaev is said to have told investigators that he and his brother were motivated to commit their alleged heinous act by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. He also reportedly told investigators that he and his brother were not connected to any foreign terrorist groups. Whether true or not, they are certainly heroes in jihadist circles.
Members of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah were dancing in the streets of Gaza, handing out candies to passerbys, according to the Israeli News Agency. Mohammad al-Chalabi, the head of the Muslim Salafi group, which is a jihadist group headquartered in Jordan, proclaimed that he was happy to see the horror in America.
Amidst the outpouring of concern for the victims who lost lives and limbs at the hands of the jihadist bombers, a deluded caller to a PBS radio program, just hours after the bombings, said the bombings were a response to our drone attacks, while another caller explained it as a kind of retribution for torture inflicted by American security forces acting under the authority of the government.
Richard Falk a top official of the United Nations Human Rights Council, who quoted these callers in his Foreign Policy Journal article, entitled A Commentary on the Marathon Murders looked at the Boston terrorist attacks as an understandable reaction to the American global domination project.
Falk brought Israel into his discussion. As long as Tel Aviv has the compliant ear of the American political establishment, those who wish for peace and justice in the world should not rest easy, Falk wrote. And he took verbal shots at Israels belligerent leader, Bibi Netanyahu and at President Obama for succumbing to the Beltway ethos of Israel First.
Falk went on to write that Americas military prowess and the abiding confidence of its leaders in hard power diplomacy makes the United States a menace to the world and to itself We should be asking ourselves at this moment, How many canaries will have to die before we awaken from our geopolitical fantasy of global domination?
Falks article, by the way, was carried by Al Jazeera.
When asked whether UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon had anything to say about Falks outrageous rationalizations for the Boston bombings, a terrorist attack the Secretary General had himself condemned, the spokesperson for Ban Ki-moon noted that the Secretary General did not appoint Mr. Falk.
Richard Falk speaks independently; he is not a representative of the Secretary-General, so he is free to say what he wants to say. The Secretary-General doesnt comment on everything everybody says, the spokesperson said.
Why then did Ban Ki-moon choose to so harshly condemn the anti-Muslim video last fall? After all, he is not responsible for the views of the producer who created the video either. And what of Ban Ki-moons declaration, in response to the video and the violence it supposedly sparked, that freedom of expression should only be guaranteed and protected when used for common justice, common purpose? He said that using freedom of expression to provoke cannot be protected in such a way. Whether one agrees with this very limited view of freedom of expression or not, it is certainly not consistent with the Secretary Generals reluctance to criticize Falks irresponsible comments on the Boston bombings on the grounds that Falk, even though he is associated with the UN, is free to say what he wants to say.
Some commentators would have us believe that the Tsarnaev brothers, who emigrated in 2002 or 2003 from Dagestan, a Russian republic adjoining Chechnya where Islamic jihad flourished, should be pitied as misunderstood immigrant kids having assimilation problems.
In an April 22nd New York Times op-ed article entitled Immigrant Kids, Adrift, the authors Marcelo M. Suárez-Orozco and Carola Suárez-Orozco wrote:
The alleged involvement of two ethnic Chechen brothers in the deadly attack at the Boston Marathon last week should prompt Americans to reflect on whether we do an adequate job assimilating immigrants who arrive in the United States as children or teenagers Taking in what Emma Lazarus called the wretched refuse, including asylum seekers like the Tsarnaev brothers, without providing a scaffold of support undermines the promise of America.
To the contrary, we should be reflecting on how we can be more vigilant and whether liberalized immigration policies now under consideration in Congress could make this task even more difficult. We should also examine why the FBI dropped the ball in not pressing forward aggressively with a thorough investigation of the older brother, after having received an inquiry from the Russian government. Why didnt the FBI follow up on his contacts when he visited Russia for several months last year?
The Tsarnaev brothers turned on the country that gave them freedom, protected them from the violence plaguing their place of birth and bestowed on them vast opportunities for a better life, including a good education. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev became a U.S. citizen on September 11, 2012, while his older brother, a permanent U.S. resident, was still waiting to become a citizen when the Boston bombings took place. They had nothing legitimate to complain about regarding how the United States has treated them since their arrival on our shores.
These jihadists bear total responsibility for their evil actions, which were inspired by their evil ideology, not the country that took them in and gave them so much.
When one side belebrates bombing women and children and the other side protects women and children, which side does this moron expect us to favor?
If youd like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
More likely he's being tightly controlled by an attorney supplied by CAIR, coached to provide exactly the narrative the leftist press wants him to provide.
I'll say it again - it would've been far more just had he been shot to crap on that boat.
If we’d only adopt the “medieval savages first” policies like the UN I guess we’d be ok.
"In a February 1979 New York Times op-ed, after Khomeini had returned to Iran, Falk wrote, "The depiction of him as fanatical, reactionary and the bearer of crude prejudices seems certainly and happily false." Falk wrote that Khomeini's "entourage was uniformly composed of moderate, progressive individuals," and that "having created a new model of popular revolution based, for the most part, on nonviolent tactics, Iran may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance for a third-world country."