Tag Archives: Tamerian Tsarnaev

‘Big Sis’ Pushes Orwellian (1984) Lies and Tyranny

BigBrotherOriginally posted at Clash Daily

In his 1949 novel 1984, George Orwell wrote something that seems to be very applicable today, especially as it relates to the things liberals say when trying to explain away what is undeniably true. Orwell said that “Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing.”

When it comes to the power of “tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of [his] own choosing,” President Barack Obama is a pro. Responding to the NSA scandal, Barack Obama shared the opinion that “You can’t have 100% security and 100% privacy.”

While that premise may be somewhat true, it’s still amazing that when it comes to abortion Barack Obama is able to overcome every obstacle to ensure that the right to 100% privacy is always 100% secure.

In like manner, taking a few minutes off from purchasing billions of rounds of ammunition and ordering riot gear, on New York City’s political show Road to City Hall, Homeland Security Secretary/catcher of dangerous border-crossing hairdryers Janet Napolitano told Errol Louis that she thinks “people have gotten the idea that there’s an Orwellian state out there that somehow we’re operating in. That’s far from the case.”

Sounds like some “tearing and putting together” may be going on, because Janet Napolitano’s comments on the NSA controversy sound very similar to Barack Obama’s over at Ohio State. Giving the keynote address, Obama warned graduates to “reject these voices” that caution of the evils of government, saying, “Still, you’ll hear voices that incessantly warn of government … or that tyranny always lurks just around the corner. You should reject these voices.”

Now, despite denying an Orwellian state, Janet Napolitano has done exactly what Orwell was talking about when she pointed out to Mr. Louis the various difficulties involved in “striking the right balance between security and civil liberties.”

That explanation not only supports Obama’s ongoing “tearing and putting back together” endeavor, but also explains why Big Sis allows our porous border to remain open – the DHS’s “shape of its own choosing” worries that the civil liberties of illegal aliens may be infringed upon.

Nonetheless, on Road to City Hall, Ms. Napolitano urged Americans not to worry about government reconnaissance efforts infringing on Constitutional rights, because there are lots of protections built into a system. That’s the same system that dropped the ball when Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev came back to the United States after spending six months being trained in terrorism tactics in Chechnya.

To reinforce that built-in protections argument, Ms. Napolitano then pointed to a privacy office embedded in her own department that is “constantly reviewing our policies and procedures.”

Janet Napolitano touting protections “embedded” into a system that she’s in charge of – to keep a check on her – is sort of like Obama appointing Eric Holder to investigate why Eric Holder authorized the seizure of Fox News reporter James Rosen’s private emails after accusing Rosen of being a “possible co-conspirator” in violation of the Espionage Act. It would be laughable if it weren’t so appalling.

Then, as if disrespecting Americans’ privacy is the only area where Janet stressed that, although the government is indeed going “willy-nilly and using any kind of data” they can gather, “No one should believe that we are simply going willy-nilly and using any kind of data that we can gather.”the government falls short, Ms. Napolitano mentioned that she felt the “federal government hasn’t done the best job keeping the public informed about how it is treating the enormous amounts of personal information that could potentially be used in intelligence gathering.”

Janet shared that “I think we need to do a better job of explaining to the American people exactly what is kept, what are the real restrictions on how — I’m just talking now for DHS, Department of Homeland Security – how we use it, how long we can keep it, how we share it, all those things.”

Then, citing certain challenges as an excuse to brazenly flout the US Constitution, Janet Napolitano denied an Orwellian state as she advanced the Orwellian state. On behalf of Barack Obama, Big Sis gently excused government intrusion into the right to privacy because of the difficulty technology poses when it comes to striking a balance between “security and privacy and other values.”

Therefore, in an effort to explain away what is undeniably true, with Orwellian proficiency Janet Napolitano has proven that with this administration it’s not so much the “100% security and 100% privacy” issue we should be worried about. Instead, it’s the Orwellian tendency for Barack Obama and Janet Napolitano to present 100% lies and 100% tyranny as 100% truth and 100% liberty.

Watch the Good Guys and Leave the Terrorists Alone

600744_10151638724009411_850450878_nOriginally posted at American Thinker

Barack Obama alleges that snooping is in the nation’s best interest because it is a powerful tool needed to keep Americans safe from dangerous terrorists. Yet, taking political correctness to a whole new level of lunacy, mosques, where terrorist types like to mingle with likeminded people, are currently off-limits to spying, snooping, and undercover stakeouts.

That’s right – cell phones are being tapped, keystrokes on computers are being logged and email intercepted and read; but mosques, which are home base for homegrown terrorists, are strictly off-limits to counterterrorism efforts.

Apparently this is how it works: Let’s say law enforcement is looking for a serial murderer who’s known to take a cooking class or two before butchering his victims. So to prevent non-murdering chefs from being offended, the thing to do would be to avoid looking in culinary schools for the killer. Right?

Then, while the Killer Chef hides in a cookery sharpening his meat cleavers, the FBI should spend most of its time surveilling florists, shoe stores, and yoga classes. To avoid insulting Jeffrey Dahmer types, the protocol must be to never ever search for suspicious-looking characters in places where lust killers with cannibalistic tendencies are likely to hang out.

And why, pray tell, if we can’t look for Muslim terrorists in Muslim mosques, is the Obama administration demanding gun owners register firearms? Why are gun shows and gun shops being scrutinized by undercover goons? In other words, if we apply the Muslim terrorist/mosque logic, if the Second Amendment is such a dire threat to the safety of America, gun shops should be the last place Obama looks for gun owners.

Since 2011, in order to investigate or go undercover to find terrorists in mosques, which is supposed to be what the prying program is all about, according to Investor’s Business Daily FBI agents need “high-level approval from a special oversight body at the Justice Department dubbed the Sensitive Operations Review Committee.” The SORC is a DOJ-appointed body made up of a chairman, members, and staff, all of whose identities are top secret.

If by chance one should suspect a sleeper cell is in a neighborhood nearby, fret not; just dial up the Sensitive Operations Review Committee. If no one answers, leave a message, because the SORC may be on a Sensitive Operations mission in Mexico supplying high-powered rifles to drug cartels and will no doubt promptly return the call as soon as they return.

In all seriousness, the Sensitive Operations Review panel was set up in response to Islamist groups who were offended that mosques were the targets of FBI stings looking for Muslim extremists. Apparently the ACLU and CAIR sued the FBI for surreptitiously staking out jihadists in Los Angeles mosques. Both organizations defined looking for Islamist extremists where Islamic extremists assemble as a violation of Muslim civil rights.

Prior to current don’t-hurt-Muslim-feelings insanity being instituted, reports claim that there were dozens of fruitful sting operations conducted where potential terrorism was thwarted and American lives saved.

Can’t have that! Therefore, with Obama in charge, if the procedures were working, the thing to do is to stop diligently monitoring any potential breeding grounds for homegrown jihadists.

That’s why the Boston Bombers, who supposedly were inspired by Doku Umarov, a Chechen terrorist known as Russia’s bin Laden, successfully blew up a pressure cooker filled with ball bearings, nails, and BBs at an iconic marathon, killing three and maiming 264.

The duo could have been stopped. Tragically, they weren’t because while Tamerlan Tsarnaev was exhibiting “rage filled rants” and mocking Martin Luther King Jr. during worship service at the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, reconnaissance efforts were focused on more pressing threats such as the whereabouts of tea party members, pro-lifers, ex-military men, Christians, and political conservatives.

It wasn’t until after the Boston Marathon bombing that Tsarnaev’s Cambridge, Massachusetts mosque was identified, and even then, to avoid “jumping to conclusions,” counterterrorism officials hesitated to suggest that the Imam could help identify the Tsarnaev brothers from the images captured on video from the day of the bombing.

Because hey, even though it’s been alleged that violent jihad is being preached inside some American mosques, acknowledging that fact and monitoring where jihadists worship would cut in on the precious time needed to track, crack down on, and harass American citizens who terrorize the country by bitterly clinging to the First and Second Amendment.

 

%d bloggers like this: