Skip to comments.Feds Won't Say if Tsarnaevs Had Gov't-Funded Phones
Posted on 04/25/2013 3:33:48 PM PDT by NoLibZone
On Thursday, the Boston Herald reported that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) refused to answer questions about whether Boston terror suspects Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev had a government-paid cellphone because of privacy laws.
The Herald reported Wednesday 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.
The Lifeline phone subsidy program, referred to as the Obama phone program by its critics, charges paying cell phone customers an average monthly fee of $2.50 per household to fund the now $2.2 billion program that provides lower-income individuals with free cell phones and service.
Lawmakers from both parties have recently expressed concern about fraud and abuse in the Lifeline free cell phone program, as well as the phones increasing use by criminals.
"I hear from law enforcement that these phones are often found at crime scenes and are used in drug deals," said Rep. Tim Griffin (R-AK). "Why? It's because you can't trace them."
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Intel screw-ups, immigration screw-ups, and now giving these people welfare and phones???
Of course you can trace them. A given serial number to a given recipient. The purchased pay-as-you-go phones, OTOH, can be a problem.
Also give them Obamabombs. Just kill us quick.
Answer: They probably did.
Its state-sponsored terrorism.
Only now its our state sponsoring the terrorists
I was just thinking about the same thing earlier today. And it is only accelerating. Just think of how screwed up things will be like on 20JAN2017!
We will look back to 2013 as a completely different time.
What's really amazing is how many federal agencies now seem comfortable refusing to answer simple questions.
Even Patrick in Massachusetts is getting into the game by refusing to answer if the terrorists were on state aid.
Where is this refusal to be transparent with taxpayer funds coming from?
I wish they were as concerned about regular Americans’ privacy as they are the terrorists.
Lack of consequences, feeling that they are invulnerable combined with a ineffective and feckless opposition - not to mention a populace that votes for them no matter what.
Did he get the Mercedes for free as well? Do you have to be a terrorist to get one?
Gov. Patrick giving a dead terrorist privacy.
since when do terrorists qualify for privacy protection?
And the Massachusetts state university system is refusing to reveal whether the younger jihadist was getting free or reduced tuition.
Perhaps the elder jihadist was even collecting welfare $$ while receiving terrorist training in Russia. The governor is refusing to release the information.
>>since when do terrorists qualify for privacy protection?
January 2009, but you already knew that. :-)
Constitution-respecting patriots can point out that Congress cannot use any clause in Section 8 of Article I to justify laying taxes so that feds can fund phones given to the public.
The fact that they refuse to answer—pretty much answers the question for me.
Don’t you just love the little heart-shaped cutout for the camera on Rico Suave’s phone case?
‘Wonder if his obama phone was used to detonate the devices.
So we should assume the bombs were set off by tax money Obama welfare phones until they prove otherwise. Time to start using their outrageous tactics. Right now we can say the administration will not confirm or deny this. So lets say it loudly.
It's become mind-boggling...
Note to FCC:
You waited too long to say no.
“Of course you can trace them. A given serial number to a given recipient. The purchased pay-as-you-go phones, OTOH, can be a problem.”
I’ve seen no information yet that these two were attempting to hide anything. They were on the radar and ignored
“Only now its our state sponsoring the terrorists”
Only a matter of time till we become a net-exporter of terrorism
It’s precious. I’m sure he was quite the (infidel) ladies man in his prime.
Marry the prettiest dim bulb, and get her to work 80 hours a week for you.
They track them as well as they tracked the guns in F&F
But, we’re supposed to trust these ya-ho’s w/ our healthcare, 20M+ illegals, gun confiscation, etc.??
And still the GOP ‘leadership’ is mum
The taxer conspiracy nut jobs in the Democrat Party didn't see the hypocrisy in demanding "your paperz pleaze!"
It’s all for privacy concerns you know.
“Constitution-respecting patriots can point out that Congress cannot use any clause in Section 8 of Article I to justify laying taxes so that feds can fund phones given to the public.”
Funny how sequestration has not affected these type programs either
Obviously the right choice if you are going to use them as a detonation system. Figure investigators will recover the serial number of the receiving phone, and the cell company is going to know the phone that made the call or sent the text. Then they'll find the convenience store that sold the pay-gos, and you'd better hope the video isn't still around, and the clerk doesn't remember anything of use about the wog that bought them.
However, it appears they actually used a remote control meant for use with model cars.
Can you hear me now?
But Obama is happy to declare executive orders that over rule privacy laws so he can grab your guns.
We need the Obamaphone gal to add terrorists on to her list of qualifiers. LOL
1. Clearly, the regime is in cover up mode, like after Benghazi. This family should never have been allowed in the country by immigration; FBI and Homeland screwed up intel and failed to follow up leads; they were getting welfare and last I heard the phone that blew the bombs may have been an Obamaphone.
2. So long as the Obama regime is in power the MSM will not call them out for withholding information from the public.
Privacy for the benefit of the politicians and their policies.
I will interpret their silence to mean “yes”.