Accessories
After the fact? And how much did they know before?
And how many people would try to protect a friend who was the Boston bomber?
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
After the fact? And how much did they know before?
And how many people would try to protect a friend who was the Boston bomber?
meh
Defending the indefensible. When have we heard this before?
I am waiting for the libs to line up to defend what these “friends” did. It will happen. I can just hear one of them saying, ” I would have done the same thing [trash evidence to save bomber friend from arrest.]”
Mark my words. Some will say it.
“And how many people would try to protect a friend who was the Boston bomber?”
Comrades.
I wonder if they had received a “friendly” warning not to attend the Boston Marathon?
Attention: The following people will not be killed. My friends.
Muslims may jihad in peace. Christians on the other hand, not so much.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/05/01/Breaking-Pentagon-Confirms-Will-Court-Martial-Soldiers-Who-Share-Christian-Faith
I would once have guessed that almost nobody who wasn’t already involved in the plot would protect a friend under such circumstances. But that criminal complaint — linked from Ace’s page — makes chilling reading. It does not appear that any of those three “friends,” not even the American among them, gave a moment’s thought to notifying the authorities that they recognized their college buddy as Bomber No. 2 or taking the vaseline and emptied fireworks that they found in his room to the police. Instead, at least as far as the criminal complaint reveals, they promptly decided to first remove and then hide the evidence to protect their friend without a qualm or a second thought as to whether he was worth protecting. If that choice was so easy for these three, how many others might have done the same thing just as readily?
Near as I can tell he was their CONNECTION.
The cannabis biz is still swept off the pulp fiction.
As for the duo, it would appear that they were able to maintain their bliss by way of THC.
These fellows were career criminals — a common path for islamists — who nonetheless stayed on the dole — to the extent they could fleece ‘The Man.’
This profile is congruent with those of muslim bombers in England and the Continent.
So, the FIRST thing to look for while profiling is taking government benefits. I can’t remember a jihadi who wasn’t either directly on the government dime (welfare, employee) or indirectly on the government dime. (BBC, research outfits, et. al.)
I suspect that they knew before the fact, and are tryng to hide that since it will significantly add to any time behind bars.
And the fact that one of them had that “Terrorista #1” license plate…?
One is quoted as saying that he just wanted to keep his friend out of trouble. What a laugh! Their moral compass is so broken that they think the bombing is like a college student getting caught with a bong in his dorm room.
This foreign student thing from Muslim countries needs to be reconsidered.
I suppose somebody’s going to say something about loyalty to one’s friends. I hope they do. Because that means disloyalty to the country, the dead and maimed, and the future victims.
Mr. Frank …
College educated muslims — in Western universities — are the sole source for the worst of the worst jihadis.
STEM fields are overrun with islamist fanatics.
Morsi
Atta
Arafat
Ahmadinejad
et. al.
For the most part, their educations were paid for by the infidel.
Hence, Western university life is the number one causation for fanatical radicalization.
We are educating fellows who can’t possibly fit in back in their own cultures — which drives them insane with rage — against US.
Western society has no utility for fellows who need to drop everything three times during the workday to pray at rote hatred against their fellow Americans — plus sunset and dusk.
It’s not for nothing that no-one can square that circle back among the ummah.
Islam is not of the 8th Century — it’s really a Neolithic ethos — suitable for that stage in human experience when skirmish warfare was perpetual — and mostly cousin against cousin.
Bare feet, spears and arrows were rather limiting towards strategic warfare. Man didn’t have wars — he had the feud.
If you take it in that light, then the true nature of islam stands starkly revealed.
It’s an inchoate feudalism; no castles, forts or redoubts. You either have a horse — and can strike tactically — or you don’t and can’t.
I went to a conservative meetup in NY this week. Met a congressman there. He’s on the Homeland Security committee.
This man said that American citizens know almost Nothing about the many moslem radicals who’ve crossed our southern border already. That they live in Mexico for a year or two, becoming fluent in Spanish to pass for Mexican, then come in. He said that this Administration has the policy, when one or more of these terrorists are found, of sending the FBI in a.s.a.p.. which has the dual effect of cutting off any publicity by making the case “instantly classified,” and protecting the radicals from Americans’ vengeance.
This congressman said he personally knows of several cases, but that they’re just the tip of the iceberg: Obama & Co. have made it almost impossible to track these killers.
Boston Globe Headline: 3 accused of obstructing bombing investigation. On campus, a friendship of immigrants grew strong.
Well, several things come to mind:
1) What were their majors? Anyone studying chemistry as a major has a substantial chance of knowing this kind of stuff offhand.
2) What were their backgrounds? Lots of teen males explore this arena of knowledge without a great deal of deep intention of nefarious purposes. Knowing how to “blow things up” is just one of those things that a teen male, esp a tech geek, likes to know on general principles. You DO NOT have to really, really intend to do anything with it.
I think certainly their behavior bears looking into, even extensively, but it’s far from conclusive, or even strongly suggestive, evidence.
}}} And how many people would try to protect a friend who was the Boston bomber?
You’re making a presumption, here. Perhaps they were protecting him because they thought it was a chance of mistaken identity and they were just trying to protect him from incrimination, still believing him innocent…. “He’d never do something like that. We were all just playing around, talking about this stuff… But it would LOOK bad to the cops…”
Not saying that’s the answer, but it is at least a plausible alternative based on the current information.
Altogether it’s certainly something to “make you go, ‘hmmm….'”.
}}}} Kadyrbayev and Tazhayakov both admitted they agreed to throw away the backpack after concluding from news reports that Dzhokhar Tsarnaev must be one of the bombers. Kadyrbayev decided to remove the backpack from Tsarnaev’s room “to help his friend Tsarnaev avoid trouble,” the affidavit said.
OK, never mind. Hadn’t read that part.
Btw:
}}} using a weapon of mass destruction
So, we’re all in agreement, then, that Saddam HAD “weapons of mass destruction”?
I mean, if our bar for the term now includes homemade bombs, then any state’s National Guard, as well as most mining sites and demolition companies, have “weapons of mass destruction”.
:-S