UNREAL: Obama Refuses To Call Boston Bombings 'Terror Attack'
- This topic has 40 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 11 months ago by rationalfrummie.
April 15, 2013 10:24 pm at 10:24 pm #609016achosidParticipant
What a J-E-R-K.April 15, 2013 11:02 pm at 11:02 pm #946056
I think he just wants to be sure. You can’t prove it’s a terrorist until you know that it was an organization and not just one nutjob with access to materials he shouldn’t have access to.
Then again, the fact that it occurred “Naqba” should be more than enough for us to know who did it.April 15, 2013 11:10 pm at 11:10 pm #946057charliehallParticipant
Not a jerk at all. The jerks are the people who are jumping to conclusions before the investigations are complete. Let the police and other investigatory agencies do their jobs.April 15, 2013 11:23 pm at 11:23 pm #946058
you idiot: a) as the world leader he won’t say until he’s sure. if this doesn’t make sense, you are an idiot 2) there are external imlication (think overseas) once it gets labeled a terrorist attack 3) he doesn’t want ppl like u going “hurrdurr kill the merslims” if it was just as likely to have been caused by any number of unhinged nut jobs.April 15, 2013 11:34 pm at 11:34 pm #946059writersoulParticipant
Just saw the news- they’re all calling it an act of terror. Apparently, the White House is taking it under consideration.April 16, 2013 12:44 am at 12:44 am #946060playtimeMember
1)Fort Hood shooting, it was confirmed ages ago that it was a Muslim, who shouted ‘alah ackbar’ before he gunned them down.
To this day, Obama refuses to call it a terrorist attack.
2) According to Obama, there is a very big difference between “Act of terror’ and “Terrorist attack.”
3) Having said that, if we were to find out that the bombings were caused by a deranged psycho because he finished last in last years marathon, would you call him a terrorist?April 16, 2013 1:07 am at 1:07 am #946061VogueMember
Yes, I would.April 16, 2013 1:38 am at 1:38 am #946062yehudayonaParticipant
Remember how Muslims were initially blamed for the Oklahoma City bombing? Bloggers and pundits can jump to conclusions, but government officials shouldn’t. Note that Governor Patrick, Mayor Menino, and the Chief of Police also aren’t calling it a terror attack. Let the investigators determine who’s responsible.April 16, 2013 1:46 am at 1:46 am #946063
Remember how Muslims were initially blamed for the Oklahoma City bombing? Bloggers and pundits can jump to conclusions, but government officials shouldn’t. Note that Governor Patrick, Mayor Menino, and the Chief of Police also aren’t calling it a terror attack. Let the investigators determine who’s responsible.
Is it your contention that only Moslems can do terror? Oklahoma city was a terror attack.
And this almost certainly was also. If you really must, you can call it an “apparent terror attack”.April 16, 2013 2:07 am at 2:07 am #946064kfbParticipant
You have to be really blind and liberal to not think this was a terrorist attack right away. The second I heard that there were explosions in Boston, I knew immediately it was a terrorist attack and 99% sure it was an arab. I didn’t think Jews were that naiveApril 16, 2013 2:10 am at 2:10 am #946065playtimeMember
kfb- that’s one of the reasons you don’t work for the fbi.April 16, 2013 3:20 am at 3:20 am #946066147Participant
I was in Boston on Monday April 15th, but fortunately of 1996 & not of 2013.
I was on Pan Am 103 on the 14th, but fortunately April 14 1988 & not Teves 14th 1988.April 16, 2013 3:31 am at 3:31 am #946067
Actually I think, short of a massive electrical explosion, most people’s minds went straight to terror. BH we have been so lucky that so many terrorist attempts have been thwarted by the American government. Thank Gd they do such a great job at keeping up safe. But let’s be honest, when you heard terrorist attack, you think Muslim. Yes there have been a few who weren’t, but the majority were and will be.April 16, 2013 3:47 am at 3:47 am #946068
Ah, all the libs here protecting their liberal Pres. He hasn’t even called this terrorism, which it is, whether it’s homegrown or foreign. Who is he scared of? And when he does find the culprit of this terrorism – he won’t do a thing – if it’s a foreign entity. Just like his buddy Clinton didn’t do anything when we were repeatedly attacked. All this country knows is liberalism and appeasement. If Bush wouldn’t have retaliated from the attack of 9/11 these incidents would be a daily occurance in the US.April 16, 2013 4:16 am at 4:16 am #946069
His teleprompter didn’t have the word terrorist in it. Neither did it have the word terror by the Benghazi terror attacks which Hillary Clinton took the blame for instead of this sorry excuse for a president.April 16, 2013 4:23 am at 4:23 am #946070
Nakba day is May 15.April 16, 2013 5:17 am at 5:17 am #946071yehudayonaParticipant
Popa, of course it’s likely it was a terror attack, but as much as I dislike Obama, I think he’s handling this correctly by letting the investigators determine what happened before making a definitive statement. It’s much better than jumping to the wrong conclusion (think Bush and WMD). Obama said the perpetrators would be brought to justice. That sounds pretty presidential to me.April 16, 2013 7:25 am at 7:25 am #946072springbok007Participant
Judge, jury, executioner three for one deal. This is bigger than all of us leave it to the authorities it is not our job to convict or label situations. Let all so show maturity and be busy with learning Torah, is sounds more productive at least in my eyes.April 16, 2013 10:01 am at 10:01 am #946073Charles ShortMember
I think ‘terrorist attack’ implies that the attack had political motives rather than personal or delusional motives.April 16, 2013 11:28 am at 11:28 am #946074
^ like bush and the wmd? The bush administration had intel that there were weapons on mass destruction. Their problem was waiting so long to make good on their promise to go in and the weapons were probably smuggled underground to Saudi Arabia. Don’t put Obama, lehavdeil, and President Bush in the same sentence.April 16, 2013 11:59 am at 11:59 am #946075squeakParticipant
MR, nope, there never were any. It has been all but proven that the intel was fabricated so that jr. could get revenge for his tatte. The sites that supposedly had the wmd showed no evidence of ever having any, radiological or otherwise.
So yes please, do not lump Bush with Obama unless Obama goes on to prove himself as debase as Bush.April 16, 2013 12:36 pm at 12:36 pm #946076
I think ‘terrorist attack’ implies that the attack had political motives rather than personal or delusional motives.
Yes, and that is by far the most likely case. So it would fair and accurate to call it an “apparent terrorist attack”. When you hear hoofbeats, don’t look for zebras.
yy: Come now, what is the reason he deliberately refrained from calling a terror attack, and has not referred to any of the other clearly terror attacks that have happened under his watch as such? (Fort Hood, Benghazi).
You might agree with his reason, but if so–say that. If you agree with it, you should have no reason to hide it.April 16, 2013 2:48 pm at 2:48 pm #946079
So David Axelrod explained that the reason Obama hasn’t called it a terrorist attack is that maybe it was conservatives killing people for Tax Day.
“I’m sure what was going through the president’s mind is — we really don’t know who did this — it was tax day. Was it someone who was pro–you know, you just don’t know.”April 16, 2013 2:51 pm at 2:51 pm #946080
Ok, but Hagel is now in news calling it “cruel act of terror”. I guess our thread worked.April 16, 2013 2:51 pm at 2:51 pm #946081
WIY: Nakba is Yom Yerushalayim and not Yom Ha’atma’ut? My bad. Thanks.April 16, 2013 2:53 pm at 2:53 pm #946082The little I knowParticipant
I am shocked that some here, and our own president, are hesitating to call this terror. According to all definitions of terror I could find, it is without a doubt a terror attack. Whether to blame Islamists varies on one’s love of them or the subscribing to their values. Perhaps, we have become conditioned to equating terror with Islam. That’s not an indication of racism or Islamophobia – it’s what Islam generated by its behavior for the past many decades. And if our president doesn’t see that, then he once again proves he lacks the intellect and value system to serve as our leader.
The country looks to Obama’s words to determine if he is being presidential. If we were a bit smarter, we would examine his actions. And that is yet to be determined. I don’t trust him, but he has not personally asked to borrow money from me.April 16, 2013 3:14 pm at 3:14 pm #946083
Nakba Day is generally commemorated on May 15, the day after the Gregorian calendar date for Israel’s Independence. In Israel, Nakba Day events have been held by some Arab citizens on Yom Ha’atzmaut (Israel’s Independence Day), which is celebrated in Israel on the Hebrew calendar date (5 Iyar or shortly before or after). Because of the differences between the Hebrew and the Gregorian calendars, Independence Day and the official 15 May date for Nakba Day usually only coincide every 19 years.[
From wikiApril 16, 2013 4:32 pm at 4:32 pm #946084
Charles Snort -“I think ‘terrorist attack’ implies that the attack had political motives rather than personal or delusional motives.”
You’re so influenced by liberalism -you conjure up definitions. Even today the Pres just called it terrorism, but said he doen’t know if it’s homegrown or foreign. Perhaps yesterday when he made his comments he didn’t know the cause of the explosion. It’s amazing to me how Frum Jews, not just you, can be more liberal than even one of the most Liberal presidents ever.April 16, 2013 4:40 pm at 4:40 pm #946085
WIY: Ah. Thanks.April 16, 2013 5:11 pm at 5:11 pm #946086oomisParticipant
Certainly it was an act of terror, but was it actually a “terrorist attack” in the sense that we think nowadays? There is a distinction, and while we have our suspicions, there is no proof as yet. I believe it probably was meant to terrorize, but we have no intel as yet as to who is taking the credit for it, do we?April 16, 2013 5:27 pm at 5:27 pm #946087
OOmis – sorry to inform you, but when an act of terror is committed – this is a terrorist attack.
We don’t know, as of yet, who committed this terrorist act.April 16, 2013 5:33 pm at 5:33 pm #946088
the level of racism in the yeshivish world never ceases to amuse me.April 16, 2013 5:35 pm at 5:35 pm #946089
the level of racism in the yeshivish world never ceases to amuse me.
I’m sorry to hear that racism amuses you.April 16, 2013 6:18 pm at 6:18 pm #946090
irony dude, irony. i would say around half the guys in my yeshiva were legit birthers.April 16, 2013 6:21 pm at 6:21 pm #946091
Is being a birther now assumed racism?April 17, 2013 1:35 am at 1:35 am #946092ezer15Member
There goes sam 2 again defending modern and obama.April 17, 2013 1:36 am at 1:36 am #946093ezer15Member
achosid is rightApril 17, 2013 12:08 pm at 12:08 pm #946094
Oomis, of course the FBI has intel they haven’t shared with the public yet. They always have more information than they let be known- for good reason. One of the men in question is a Saudi national , and as much as the left wants to point a finger at a teeny percentage of Muslims committing these acts, we k ow better. I’m sure there is a small cell in Boston, that wouldn’t surprise me at all. Details will emerge I guess well have to wait and see.April 17, 2013 2:03 pm at 2:03 pm #946095
The Saudi national was released. He is no longer a suspect. Back to the drawing board. I really hope they solve this and quickly!April 17, 2013 2:30 pm at 2:30 pm #946096akupermaParticipant
EXPLANATION OF THIS DISCUSSION:
Obama, being in what is probably his final term of the last elected office he will every hold (only John Quincy Adams went back into politics after being president – Obama will probably end up as a professor) – he has finally learned to think before speaking. This is an improvement. It is very bizarre for “inside the beltway” (but then again, he’s a lame duck). He wisely kept his mouth shut until he had some facts rather than making a quick foolish statement that would be disproven by soon to be discovered facts. If he now can learn something about economics, the country might be in good shape.April 17, 2013 4:33 pm at 4:33 pm #946097rationalfrummieMember
Obama is certainly not the best president this country has ever had, but dissing him on economics is a joke. While Romnsy and many republicans wanted to let Detroit fail, Obama and democrats bailed the auto industry out, and crated thousands of jobs. The stock market has risen thousands of points in the past 4 years.
4 years ago, Banks collapsed, markets crashed, companies struggled to make payroll, and credit was impossible to get. The Real estate bubble dramatically and completely burst.
We are not living in paradise yet, but we’re a lot better off now than in 2008. The Dow Jones closed on November 4th 2008 at about 9,600. 4 years later, its hovering around 14,500.
Shouldn’t Obama’s socialist, wacko economic policies have destroyed the economy and forced the stock market to tumble and fail?! (Insert sarcasm here)
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.