Boston airport apologizes for fire drill on 9/11

September 11, 2013

[Photo]

BOSTON (AP) — Officials at Boston’s Logan Airport are apologizing for holding a fire drill, complete with smoke and flames, on the 12th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks.

The two hijacked jets that were flown into the World Trade Center towers that day had taken off from Logan. Gov. Deval Patrick, who did not know in advance about the drill, calls the timing of it “dumb.” But he adds that he retained confidence in the leadership of the Massachusetts Port Authority, the public agency that runs the airport.

The runway fire drill, announced on the airport’s Facebook page, drew harsh condemnation online. The port authority has apologized in a statement and says it “understands that it may have offended many of those touched by the events of Sept. 11.”

Link to an excellent speech

 

“Silence is Not an Option”

Below is the prepared text of speech given last night by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff at the Ahavath Torah Congregation in Boston.

“Death Can Be Silent – The Present State of Free Speech in the U.S., Europe and Beyond”

Speech given by Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff
Ahavath Torah Congregation, Boston
June 17, 2013
[*a few excepts]

I’ve just recently learned that the audience for my talk may be larger than I had previously thought. In addition to the listeners gathered here in Stoughton, my words may be recorded by NSA and digitally stored in a huge database — all part of the struggle against “terror” and “violent extremism”. Since this congregation is a non-profit organization, the IRS may also be listening in, just to make sure that what I say here is compatible with your tax-exempt status.
If my words ever happen to be passed on through the social media, the person who posts them may be subject to criminal penalties. Yes, that’s why U.S. Attorney Bill Killian went to Manchester, Tennessee a couple of weeks ago: to discuss using federal civil rights laws to punish those who make critical remarks about Islam.
Such is the current sorry condition of free speech the United States of America.
If it’s that bad here, what must conditions be like elsewhere? This nation used to be a beacon of liberty, the shining city on a hill that inspired the entire world — what has happened to it?
I can tell you from my own experience that Europe has slid even farther down the slippery slope to tyranny.
We, too, live under constant surveillance by our own governments.
The security services in Britain and Sweden are entitled by law to record and store all forms of electronic communications — telephone, text messaging, internet usage, and so on.
Most countries in Europe have been gung-ho to implement the EU’s diktat. So many people have been harassed, detained, arrested, prosecuted, and convicted for criticizing Islam that it would be impossible for me to mention them all. To read a full list, even if it were possible to compile one, would take several hours at least.
But let me give you a brief representative sample of Europeans who have been persecuted by their governments for their opinions on Islamization:

[A few of her examples]

From Britain: Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, a.k.a. Tommy Robinson, the founder and leader of the Islam-critical English Defence League, has been tried repeatedly on various contrived charges, and convicted on some of them. Late last year he spent several months in solitary confinement before he even made his first appearance in court.
From Finland: Jussi Halla-aho, a journalist and local politician, was tried for giving examples in his blog of things about immigrants that were now illegal to say. He was convicted and fined, and lost his appeals to all higher courts. He also lost his position within his party, the True Finns.
From the Netherlands: Geert Wilders, the leader of what may now be the most popular party in the country, was put on trial not once, but twice for expressing his opinions on Islam. After a lengthy and expensive court process, he was acquitted in both cases.
From Switzerland: Avi Lipkin, a.k.a. Victor Mordecai, was tried and convicted of “inciting hatred or discrimination against a person or a group of persons on the grounds of their race, ethnic origin or religion”. His “crime” was committed during a discussion about the upcoming referendum on the minaret ban, when he read verses from the Koran requiring Muslims to hate Christians and Jews. He was convicted.
See complete text of her speech: http://gatesofvienna.net/2013/06/silence-is-not-an-option/

What is in store for us?

Boston bombing and immigration

Why the Boston bombing problems could matter to the immigration issue

If you listened to the pundits and strategists on the left, and lamestream media, you heard the outcry about bringing the bombing into the debate over illegal immigration. Well, what debate, it was actually a private deal being crafted by a group in Congress. And just as they were ironing out their plan, the Boston Marathon bombing took place.

Almost immediately came the cries Republicans better not use this against the “immigration” proposal coming down the pike like a 90 mph fastball. You better not, they said. But there are legitimate ties and questions about immigration reform related the bombing. They were from a satellite Russian region, who came here around ten years ago. The parents returned to Dagestan.

Suspect #1 was the subject of a tip from Russia warning of radical ties, which we still haven’t got the details about. He had traveled back to the area for a six month tour, which is still being questioned.

But things seemed to fall apart as to connecting him to the bombing early on. It seems some intelligence or connections were missed. There are questions if information was shared. Then, in fact, they had a hard time connecting the pictures on a guy the feds had already questioned in detail. Someone who was on a watch list at one time anyway. Why? It looks now like something was not connected or followed through.

And now the left is adamant that “you cannot tie immigration to what happened in Boston.”  And why not, why is it suddenly off the table? The truth may be closer than you think.

One little irrelevant thing no one has mentioned is Boston had been listed as a sanctuary city in 2005, and Cambridge has long been a proud sanctuary city, something they boast about. Ah, and the bombing debacle has nothing to do with immigration?

Well, sanctuary cities have a long pattern of not working with ICE or federal immigration authorities. They consider it almost a matter of protest. Now it starts to make a little more sense. Likely a glaring reason why Libs did not want the immigration issue with the bombing investigation.

Could that have been a big part of the problem? Could it be these lax policies, and politics, played some role in the original investigation of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, suspect #1? Maybe those are the dots that didn’t connect they way they should have?

This matters if information was not shared regarding Tamerlan Tsarnaev, or others that may have known or cooperated with them — like visa violations. If the mindset was to withhold sharing of certain critical info, or not to cooperate with ICE or Feds where immigration is an issue, how far does it go? Does it impact on national security?

Policy Order Resolution
O-16
ORIGINAL ORDER
IN CITY COUNCIL
May 8, 2006

Cambridge has a proud history as a Sanctuary city, as declared by City Council Order Number 4 of April 8, 1985; and
(Whereas) There are now approximately 12 million undocumented immigrants in the United States /… …
(Whereas) Current US immigration policy does not reflect our standards of what is just, humane and moral; and
Both undocumented and documented immigrants in the U.S. fuel our economy and those of their countries of origin;

NBC Firstread Aug, 2011

In at least 2005, however, Boston was identified as a “sanctuary city” for illegal immigrants by a former lawyer for the United States Immigration and Naturalization Service.

 

Spring 2005: Sanctuary cities, states undermining the Republic

James H. Walsh

Recent proclamations by certain U.S. cities and
states offering sanctuary to all immigrants, despite
their legal standing, demonstrates contempt for federal
laws. Among the new sanctuaries or civil liberties safe
zones are the states of California, Maine, and Oregon.
Sanctuary cities include Anchorage, Baltimore,
Durham (NC), Madison (WI), along with Boston,
Houston, Los Angeles, and New York City. These
renegade governmental entities, which challenge the
validity of U.S. immigration laws, are spreading like a
cancer rotting the sinew, muscle, and bone of the
American Republic. The result, intentional or not,
promises to be a balkanized network of warring city-states.

Sanctuary Cities: What are they?

By Steve Salvi, Founder, OJJPAC.org

Despite a 1996 federal law [the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act ( IIRIRA )] that requires local governments to cooperate with Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), many large urban cities (and some small) have adopted so-called “sanctuary” policies. Generally, sanctuary policies instruct city employees not to notify the federal government of the presence of illegal aliens living in their communities. The policies also end the distinction between legal resident aliens and illegal aliens–so illegal aliens often benefit from taxpayer funded government services and programs too.

A formal sanctuary policy is a written policy that may have been passed by a local government body in the form of a resolution, ordinance, or administrative action–general or special orders, or departmental policies. Formal sanctuary cities are the easiest to identify because their sanctuary policies are in writing, often get the attention of the media, and subject to public records requests by citizens and the press.

http://www.ojjpac.org/index.asp

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?

Here come the Muslim victims

Just a rant on some very old territory.

One little Muslim, two little Muslims, three… victims.

It has already begun on the heels of the Boston bombing, Muslims are out in defense of, well, just about anything relating to Islam. They do what they always do…attack any criticism of Islamisists’ radical ideology as “criticism of all Muslims”.

Yea, that might be a good rally point for Muslims (hello, are they connecting the dots? – likely just what radicals had in mind.) but it really serves no other purpose. We get it, not every Muslim is a terrorist. But the terrorists are predominately Islamists. Do they get it?

Who has time for all this crapola being hoisted on outraged Americans? Muslims were not the victims here and they certainly were not the intended targets. Yet here they are saying Muslims are being victimized putting everyone on notice not to “generalize”. Imagine that, someone indiscriminately bombs random innocent people, and they tell us not to generalize? Go figure.

**This sounds like Obama: his administration does something and we get the lecture.

Maybe instead of spending all their time in defense of their “peacefulness”, they should be facing off, marginalizing and criticizing the Islamists for doing what they are doing? Why doesn’t that occur to them? Why don’t we hear and see it? Are they afraid?

There is one ironic note in the saga, Muslims are distancing themselves from the funeral of the eldest bomber. Imams and mosques have been asked, in the greater Muslim community in Boston, about the funeral for him and they decline to say they will hold it or hold the prayers for him. That is a positive note. Though I wonder if it is just talk?

Now if Muslims were victims of stereotyping etc. — IF it is happening — then you’d think they would focus on the source of that characterization, Islamist radicals and radicalism in general. No, they would rather blame us and “broad brush” Americans for discriminating against them.

The problem is how many times and years have we been through this. Its old. If the caliphate is the chief goal among Islamist radicals, they are all beneficiaries to the same agenda. Do they stand up and protest that agenda? Hardly. But then why is it all the rest of us, outsiders, are the immediate problem when one of them detonates something? Who are they kidding?

Seems to me we played out this act before too, we tried the dialogue route. About all we get in return is “Americans are picking on, stereotyping, and discriminating against Muslims.” But that is not the case.

I’m sorry, when people are losing limbs, their livelihood, and their very lives, my first reaction is not “poor Muslims“. So if they are not happy, then its time they face the real problem not rally up another false flag.

It is much easier for them to point to Americans lack of sensitivity for Muslims. When do I, Christians, Jews, or Americans get to be “offended”?

The week in news

This isn’t a list of the events this week, you can get that elswhere.

I saw some media coverage at the end of the week saying how media did not cover other important stories, as they were continuously covering the Boston bombing. (was that an apology?…nah) Let their navel gazing begin.

Now I’m not complaining about the coverage given Boston. That was deserved. But they hardly gave even a mention of other news, specifically the explosion in Texas. Actually the death count was higher in Texas than Boston but that is beside the point.

The real point is that they virtually locked out everything else. At a time when the Dep of Defense is expected to handle two wars simultaneously, MSM cannot get past a single story. Then they did something sort of even more hypocritical, they complained at the end of the week that media didn’t cover or mention these other stories,  which weren’t small potatoes.   Then they mention them.  I’m not going to list them.

They were obsessed by the one Boston story and nothing moved them off of it. Half the time there was nothing more to do than speculate, and they did, but they still stuck to it.

The shocker to me was that they complained that these other stories got ignored or cheated. I guess when Obama is their idol, we should expect that sort of thing. He does that self-contradicting, blatant hypocrisy constantly. Who were they complaining to, viewers? That was not clear. Was it a slip of conscience that they mentioned it? I don’t know.

If in a 24-hour news cycle, with this many competing networks, they cannot handle more than one story… well, the press is toast. Stick a fork in it. Of course, we already knew the press was dead or at least on life support since Obama. But I’m willing to bet they aren’t finished making excuses for it though. They usually say they just cover what the people care about, and they are serving the needs of the people. They were serving the needs of the people when they campaigned for Obama too.

It takes me back to an experience with media years ago. A reporter told me “on a given night, we have 6 million people watching and we get to decide what they are going to see.” Oh, how true and boldly arrogant.

Speaking of the bombastic hypocrisy of Obama, he  mentioned the Texas explosion in his Boston Bombing victory speech, which he had dismissed up to then.

He did issue a statement to Texas on the 18th:

“Today our prayers go out to the people of West, Texas in the aftermath of last night’s deadly explosion at a fertilizer plant. A tight-knit community has been shaken, and good, hard-working people have lost their lives. I want to thank the first responders who worked tirelessly through the night to contain the situation and treat the wounded.

My Administration, through FEMA and other agencies, is in close contact with our state and local partners on the ground to make sure there are no unmet needs as search and rescue and response operations continue. West is a town that many Texans hold near and dear to their hearts, and as residents continue to respond to this tragedy, they will have the support of the American people.”

Then in his speech at the conclusion of the Boston bombing, as if by afterthought, he added the following spoken words:

… Finally, let me say that even as so much attention has been focused on the tragic events in Boston, understandably, we’ve also seen a tight-knit community in Texas devastated by a terrible explosion. And I want them to know that they are not forgotten. Our thoughts, our prayers are with the people of West, Texas, where so many good people lost their lives; some lost their homes; many are injured; many are still missing.

I’ve talked to Governor Perry and Mayor Muska and I’ve pledged that the people of West will have the resources that they need to recover and rebuild. And I want everybody in Texas to know that we will follow through with those commitments.

All in all, this has been a tough week. But we’ve seen the character of our country once more.

And that is just the way it was in the news. Or as Texas Rep Ted Poe always says:
And that’s just the way it is.”