Sequester Knot Tightens on Terorrism Plot

Allow me to first restate some obvious facts. Obama and his regime of bureaucrats have been talking about the effects of sequester ever since he signed it into law. The sequester was also his idea. He rebuffed all legislative efforts to minimize the small cuts. Instead, he opted for the most bang for the buck.

The Dep of Homeland Insecurity is telling us the air traffic controller and sequester cuts are now causing flight and travel delays. This week they are screaming and delays are mounting.

Last week we had a major terrorist attack at the Boston Marathon. Within a day, Obama and his administration had labeled it terrorism — as unlikely from him as that was. Still he called it terrorism, as well as press secretary Carney. Good, we’re making progress since Benghazi. But then he also did that early before knowing who was behind it, while media and Liberal operatives pushed it as a homegrown, anti-tax, tea party member terrorism. They used dates, including tax and Patriots’ Day as well as other dates, for their rationale. (psst: could it be someone wanted to bomb the Boston Marathon?)

They pushed the idea, and even libs did not disagree using the term “terrorism”. Of, course that was before we knew who did it. That made it a lot more inconvenient when the facts came out. But Obama could not change his tune on “terrorism”, even Bostonians would attack him for that. Best to leave the term alone, and also take credit for the feds nabbing their men.

But along the way he said the bombing classified as terrorism. And terrorism, you will remember from your indoctrination lessons, means it has a political motivation to it. Anybody see where this leads directly? It really is not difficult: the conventional definition of terrorism is attack with a political motive.

Back up to the sequester, with a little review of his tactics in ObamaCare as well, which leads to Obama’s intentional infliction of pain and inconvenience on the public. Possibly even shortages of law enforcement, as he threatened earlier. Now we are seeing their plans roll out, from the White House tours, to air travel risks, to national security and defense, to problems enforcing the border. (etc, etc) He has been telling us how bad it will be, Janet Napoleanito already threatened us. Now the effects of their plans are bearing fruit.

As a memo said, they are not to spare the public from the harmful effects of Sequester.

Now you do not have to compare the bombing to what he is doing, just apply the term terrorism — inflicting intentional fear, damage or violence on people (or opponents) for political purposes. Obama is conducting a terror operation by their own terms.

He has plenty of political motivation, and he wants the effects to be as bad as possible to achieve his political ends. Just one more thing to add to the file on one Barack Hussein Obama. Hey, that would make him the Terrorist-in-Chief now, wouldn’t it?

Merriam Webster defines terrorism:
the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion

Dictionary.com

noun
1. the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes.
2. the state of fear and submission produced by terrorism or terrorization.
3. a terroristic method of governing or of resisting a government.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Update: today Biden gave a speech in Boston on the bombing:

“So why, whether it’s al-Qaeda Central out in the FATA or two twisted, perverted, cowardly, knock-off jihadis here in Boston — why do they do what they do?”… “They do it to instill fear, to have us, in the name of our safety and security, jettison what we value most and the world most values about us. … Our transparency: that’s their target.”

Sound familiar?

Picture of the two “suyspects” standing before the bombing in Boston


So which are the bigger terrorists?

3 comments on “Sequester Knot Tightens on Terorrism Plot

  1. bullright says:

    Btw: this just may point out an obvious reason Obama does not like to use the word terrorism (unless someone terrorizes him into it) …simply because the finger can point right back at him, and he knows it. Its how this Chicago Outfit operates.

    Like

  2. pepperhawk says:

    Bull

    Great article. The DHS is not arming the border patrol because it can’t “afford”
    it now. Have you ever heard anything crazier than that when they’ve bought up enough ammo to carry on a 24 yr war? Who can possibly believe this crap out of the Nazi Napolitano?

    OH, of course the sequester is causing this. Right! Such nonsense and you are absolutely right about the King being the terrorist. He’s the biggest WMD we have in this country besides his muzzie bro and jihadists buddies.

    Like

    • bullright says:

      Pepp, you are right.

      I hadn’t figured the WMD yet. .LOL I already had them as gangsters as the Chicago Outfit, cosa nostra, but terrorism is their specialty. The “father of lies” has it all over any gangsters or terrorists before him.

      Remember bin Laden took out Massoud in Afghanistan, Obama took out bin Laden. And he keeps pointing to the sequester he instigated, what a lying SOS. Its the first time he has ever been in support of cuts, because they are useful. His Alinsky tactics are as bad as any of the Muzzies’ fatwas. And I think Obastid is capable of taking out anyone against him, for that reason alone.

      Like

Comments...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s