Get PJ Media on your Apple

Rubin Reports

Now that the two (primary, at least) terrorists from the Boston Marathon attack have been killed or captured, we enter a new phase in which the dominant politically correct, factually incorrect forces try to explain away the attack.

Can this be done? Will they really try? Well, yes. True, as one of my correspondents remarked, it is much easier to obfuscate distant Benghazi than a total shutdown and horror in the middle of a major American city. Yet the spin-masters are already at work.

The first step must be, in part, a stalling technique — but it sets the pattern for what is to come. The motive must be obfuscated — this Reuters piece, “Boston Marathon Bombing Investigation Turns to Motive,” is a good start. The article spends seven paragraphs discussing the parents’ claim that the two brothers were framed.

This suggests that mass media and politicians will not shrink from suggesting — perhaps I should say “giving fair hearing” — to bizarre conspiracy theories and doubts. People shouldn’t believe these completely, is the theme, but you just can’t be too sure that two young Muslims would have any reason to harm Americans. There are now witnesses who heard the two terrorists’ mother claiming that September 11 was a U.S. plot to make people hate Muslims.

That’s where playing with that kind of fire leads.

In the Reuters article, the word “Islam” is not mentioned except to say that the two once lived in one predominantly Muslim country, and that another place they lived, Dagestan, is “a southern Russian province that lies at the heart of a violent Islamist insurgency.” Here, we have another technique: minimize Islam as a factor, and turn it into background noise.

Obviously, this will not apply completely, both because the elephant in the room is too big, and there is still some journalistic integrity in places. Both the Washington Post and Mother Jones took a lead in exposing the YouTube likes of one of the terrorists, which showed a preference for al-Qaeda views — to say the least.

There are a lot of other quivers in the arsenal of denial, however. On Face the Nation, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick said he had no idea why the Tsarnaev brothers would target ”innocent men, women, and children in the way that these two fellows did.”

The answer — of course — is that these people were not regarded as innocent at all, but as soldiers in the alleged Christian-Jewish war on Islam. This, of course, is precisely the same thinking that has been produced by Islamists for decades. Might September 11, 2001, be a clue for Patrick?

Of course, for Patrick to say that at this point in the investigation is understandable on one level: as a refusal by a government official to remark on an ongoing investigation, which is a relief from the president’s past remarks that the police acted “stupidly” with professor Henry Louis Gates and “if I had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.”

Yet what if Patrick’s claim is sustained, week after week, until the heat is off?

NBC News has just reported that Tamerlan Tsarnaev had visited an Islamist radical six times at a mosque in Dagestan. The Caucasian/Chechen angle offers some hope for successful obfuscation, as a lot of media time can be spent talking about that conflict. [Christian Science Monitor, it isn't Islam but a Chechen tribal code of honor.]

Of course, if the young men were acting as Chechens and not as Islamists they would have attacked a Russian target. The United States has not — even by the usual stretch of radical Islamist imagination — had anything to do with the conflict in Chechnya.

The more compelling the conflict in Chechnya is as a source of pain and passion, the less compelling the argument that the conflict was a motive. The Russians have indeed been brutal in suppressing the rebellion, far more than the West or Israel has acted toward anyone. So what cause overrides that one?

Yet Chechen grievances will be a good topic for obfuscation.

Be sure that soon, there will also be a frantic attempt at the “blame ourselves” theme. If the issue wasn’t such a tragic one, this would be humorous. Could America have acted more kindly toward these two brothers? Nevertheless, do not underestimate how well this theme will play with citizens who drink similar flavors of Kool-Aid.

In this pursuit of obfuscation, no idiocy is unthinkable. Canadian Liberal party leader Justin Trudeau, attempting to be an Obama clone, explained:

There is no question that this happened because of someone who feels completely excluded, someone who feels completely at war … with society.

His solution, then:

[Do not] marginalize people even further who already feel like they are enemies of society rather than people who have hope for the future.

In other words, doing anything is more dangerous than doing nothing. To combat radical Islam is to hurt people’s feelings, and that will produce more terrorism.

The brotherly duo — and their family — was treated extraordinarily well by the country they betrayed. They were allowed in, rather questionably, as permanent residents, and suddenly large numbers of relatives were in the United States as well (so much for our supposed draconian immigration laws). One of the brothers even became a citizen.

They went to the best schools. What did they learn there about the greatness of America? Was the seed of rage fertilized by U.S. education’s tendency to demonize American history as evil, greedy, racist, and imperialist?

One of them even got a scholarship.

It is vital to understand the profound difference between these two and the September 11 hijackers, men who came on a mission of sabotage and murder. They reached the U.S. shore as enemies, reliable agents of revolutionary retribution. These two young men, however, had a free choice. They had to actively close their minds to everything good they experienced and to adopt an ideology of hate. Only a very powerful force could move them in that direction.

We have seen this frequently in the United Kingdom and France.

Guess what? If comparisons are to be made to the 9/11 terrorists, it would have to be acknowledged that there is a second-generation (though, strictly speaking, these two are first generation) time bomb implanted with these two brothers — implying that we can expect many more attacks like this.

But will anyone add on that point?

The brothers’ otherwise normal activities will be used to make them seem … normal, their motive inexplicable. But on the contrary: it is their apparent normality, their seeming assimilation into American life, which makes the situation so scary.

Of course, a key argument is that Islam has nothing to do with this, and that Islamism isn’t directly behind it. A new theme that is being used by a lot of obfuscators: Muslims view “Islamic” terrorists the same way Christians view the Westboro Baptist Church.

Here is a positive evaluation of that quote which explains that the idea there is much support among Muslims for terrorism comes merely “from the Vast Right Wing Echo Chamber” — then, the author changes the argument to say the claim is that the Boston terrorists “are representative of all Muslims everywhere. It’s a ridiculous double standard.” In other words, the terrorists in Boston and everywhere else don’t represent much of anything but themselves.

As I recall, the Westboro Baptist Church doesn’t govern ten countries.

But you don’t want to be a right-wing nut, do you? Then don’t say that the Boston attack arose from an ideology of Islamism, or link it to the thousands of other such recent attacks around the world.

The truth: American Muslims themselves do not agree that support for terrorism is minimal in their community.

In 2011, 21 percent of all American Muslims — and a higher number, 32 percent, of U.S.-born Muslims — thought there is a great deal or fair amount of support for terrorism among them.

Why is the number of U.S.-born Muslims who believe this so much higher? Because they tend to be younger people who are more in contact with social media, and with people like the two young Boston bombers.

What about the Boston terrorists’ mosque and their other contacts in the Muslim community? Why didn’t they get an anti-extremist indoctrination there, an explanation of what Islam is all about?  They attended a Muslim Brotherhood-sponsored mosque — shhh! — and the Boston Muslim religious leadership is full of extremists, the evidence of which has long been available.

The mosque even received a subsidy from Boston, despite hosting anti-American speakers who made the precise arguments used to rationalize terrorism.

We won’t be hearing much about these issues though. Well, except for two aspects: a story is now circulating that one of the brothers was thrown out of his mosque for being too radical.

We will also see denunciations of the terror attack by Islamist front groups. The New York Times article on motive cited these statements three times. I believe that groups like CAIR do not support the Boston attack or al-Qaeda, but they support many other terrorist attacks, and they support the ideology and set of beliefs on which the Boston attack is based. That’s why so many associated with CAIR, even on a senior level, have become involved in anti-American terrorism.

Having followed this issue for many years: I have never heard of a single anti-radicalization program conducted by any mosque or “mainstream” Islamic group. Real moderates are isolated, vilified, denied media attention, and even forced out of local mosques.

In a 2011 Pew poll, fully half of American Muslims said their leaders aren’t doing enough to fight extremism. That last point can safely be used as a certified non-“Islamophobic” argument about where much of the problem lies — but it won’t be.

Of course, the troubled youth angle will be played to the fullest. Yes, the tribulations of young adulthood and adolescence are factors, but only inasmuch as it makes them vulnerable to systematic indoctrination. In other words, their specific psychology and even personal experiences are not the motive any more than the childhood of a professional hit-man for the Mafia is.

It is also possible to fall back on the idea that determining the motive is impossible or irrelevant — there’s just too much stuff out there, dude. In the words of Brian Levin, director of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism at California State University:

The individual, particular motivations of the perpetrators have little significance since there are multiple grievances out there and, in the Islamic world, there is free-floating angst.

That statement was too much even for Bill Maher.

Another angle will be the growing story of governmental incompetence in using intelligence to stop terrorists. In part, this is unfair since there have also been many successes. A more important issue is why government officials, politicians, army officers, academics, and journalists fear to point out the truth: look at the Nidal Hasan/Fort Hood attack. Pointing out the truth is bad for their careers and reputations, as well as sometimes counter to their own ideologies.

Obfuscators also use the partisan argument, made most memorably by a journalist who openly hoped the terrorists would be white right-wingers.

There is an unnoticed dimension here: if the attack is seen as a political defeat, it cannot be a learning experience. The question isn’t “does this attack tell us something important about the real world?”, but: “How can we explain it away so we don’t suffer a setback in the effort to fundamentally transform America into a just, non-racist society?”

And so they will claim that, in a sense, white right-wingers — or at least the kind of policies they would endorse — did cause the Boston attack. America was mean to these kids, it is aggressive in other countries, and counter-terrorist protection was reduced by budget cuts.

In other words: lying, concealing, and misleading become defined as virtuous. As Trudeau said, talking honestly about revolutionary Islamism would be to inspire more racism and terrorism.

Finally, there is the “full admission” fallback argument — on which Obama’s foreign policy is based. Sure, it was those evil SOBs, al-Qaeda, but the other Islamists are relatively good, so we have to promote them into power since only they can counter the “bad” Islamists.

That’s why Obama claims Islamist governments in Egypt, the Gaza Strip, Lebanon, Syria, Tunisia, and Turkey are good for you. Indeed, Secretary of State John Kerry, in Turkey, compared Americans’ feelings about the Boston attack to Turkish feelings about the killing of jihadis engaged in supporting a terrorist group (Hamas) who attacked Israeli soldiers during the Gaza flotilla incident.

This should not be seen merely as a clumsy statement, but as dangerous, revealing stupidity. It is dangerous because it tells Muslims that they are equally the victims of “our” terrorism; it is revealing because the context shows the equation of all violence, no matter what the cause, that reinforces such thinking.

A U.S. attack on terrorists in Yemen, Afghanistan, or elsewhere then becomes “anti-Muslim violence” that justifies the next terror attack in an American city.

Former NBC anchorman Tom Brokaw explained that American drones were killing innocent people, and this led to rage against the “presumptuousness of the United States.”

In an honest discussion it must be considered what U.S. policy factors lead to terrorism. But now there is the transfer to America of the old “cycle of violence” argument about the Middle East. Terrorists murder Israeli civilians or fire rockets at Israel, Israel defends itself, and the two events are treated as indistinguishable.

Defending yourself offends people.

The proper response: denounce the terrorists and the ideology of terrorism, and proclaim the right of focused self-defense, which means doing everything possible to retaliate against those responsible and not citizens of another country chosen at random.

The American secretary of state, a leading Canadian politician, journalists, and others are thus rationalizing in advance more such attacks.

They will get their “wish,” and then explain away the next event as more proof of their worldview.

Also read: 

John Kerry Compares Boston Bombing Victims with Turkish Flotilla ‘Activists’

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
TAKE HIS PIC DOWN, NOW!!!
Every news agency across the globe is showing the pic(s) of a sick murderer and all of the “wackos” and “nutjobs” who might be “on the fence” of doing, or not doing, something terrible are being encouraged into doing it for the FAME and NOTORIETY given by the Media. (AARRGGHH).
Show me pictures of the little boy this piece of dirt murdered in cold blood. I want to remember the joyful face of a bright-eyed young man living life to the fullest. Not some twisted killer. Show me the two women killed in the blast. Tell me stories of their lives, not the killers. I couldn’t care less about the slime that cowardly murdered innocents. Show me the runners in the Marathon – I have no idea what they look like. (But thanks to supreme stupidity by the media, I will never be able to forget the pics of a teenage killer.)
Show me the eight year-old boy – I want to identify with him, not the killer. Show me pics of the heroes – the law enforcement personnel who risked their lives to catch these butchers. Show me the guy with the boat who called it in! Show me the MIT Cop who was killed. Tell me about him, his life, his values, his experiences, not the killers.
Our collective Media is making a butcher of innocent children into a “relatable guy.” They are personalizing him. Please, please stop. I challenge you to a paradigm shift starting now. No longer does the media broadcast images of the criminal 24/7 and tell us all, all about his entire life and the lives of his relatives and friends. But rather, investigate, personalize and broadcast images of the innocent victims, the hard working law enforcement and/or military personnel. Tell us stories of their lives, their hopes, their dreams, their reality. Dig deep and deeper still, not into the killer, but in to the victims and heroes.
I won’t be holding my breath. littlegecko
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
JOHN KERRY COMPARES ISRAELI COMMANDOS TO THE BOSTON MARATHON KILLERS

kkkkkk

So according to arse kissing Kerry, the IDF commandos who killed nine violent Jew hating flotilla jihadists hellbent on illegally breaking a naval blockade to help genocidal Hamas terrorists are no better than the two Boston Marathon jihadists who killed and maimed scores of innocent Americans? Actually coming from the man who compared our brave troops in Vietnam, and their noble mission of fighting Communism, to savage, bloodthirsty, Mongol hordes we shouldn't be shocked or surprised.

51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Muslims, by and large...view radical Islam the way liberals view radical leftists.

"They are on our side, doing the "muscle" end of the business. If it's dirty and underhanded, even evil...it's all for the cause"

We make the vital...and continuing...mistake of conflating liberals with leftist radicals. It allows them to hide in plain site.

And, we do a similar thing with Muslims and radical Islamists.

Radicalism is a dirty, vicious, violent, lying, slandering enterprise. It needs a place to hide in plain sight. And, WE...give it to them. We adopt the "infused" words, phrases and "planted" ideas that soften up our resistance, crush our windpipes and strangle our voices.

We are "shamed" into silence with threats of peer pressure, ridicule and assorted slanders.

Not fighting back, not resisting, not standing up for ourselves and this land of ours...and our allies...is EXACTLY the strategy used against us by the now clearly seized agenda media, academia and pop culture traitors.

Radicals and revolutionaries are kindred spirits. Patriots ought to be as well...but, we are not. They get us to fight within ourselves like trained chimps dancing to the organ grinder...only it's a grinder of morale and national spirit.

These two Chechens are the last shores of the Rubicon. It's time to plant a flag in the ground.

51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (52)
All Comments   (52)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
There is no such thing as 'ADJECTIVE' Islam no EUPHEMISM Islam , no 'IST' or 'ISM' but there is 'IC'.
Left Wing moonbat Multi Culti, Politically Correct, Black Race Hustler society in the USA will end up destroying it.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Riddle me this my left wing correspondents: The United States intervened in the Balkans and broke apart Serb dominated Yugoslavia yet there never has been a Serb terrorist attack on US or NATO interests. Why is that? Every Serb I have met who knows that I was involved in military operations against their country holds no special animosity towards me. So please explain why after destroying Yugoslavia the Serbs aren't attacking us.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Eventually we will get to the Hillary Clinton point after all the obfuscation and delaying and denial and finger pointing at everything but Islam.

"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
4 here, 3 there...no reason to get exited....said the joker to the thief, there are many here amongst us, who fell life is but a joke.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Islam is a religion of peace, needs to be amended to, Islam is a religion of pieces.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Just an excitable boy they all said." Warren Zevon
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
"All the irrational ways they will use to blame everything but Islamism."

And with others its all the irrational ways they will use to blame everything but Islam.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Probably some bureaucrat will state that "Diversity is good" and the murderer will be went to some unreachable jail.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Just two poor misunderstood wayward youth wanting to follow their dream.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
TAKE HIS PIC DOWN, NOW!!!
Every news agency across the globe is showing the pic(s) of a sick murderer and all of the “wackos” and “nutjobs” who might be “on the fence” of doing, or not doing, something terrible are being encouraged into doing it for the FAME and NOTORIETY given by the Media. (AARRGGHH).
Show me pictures of the little boy this piece of dirt murdered in cold blood. I want to remember the joyful face of a bright-eyed young man living life to the fullest. Not some twisted killer. Show me the two women killed in the blast. Tell me stories of their lives, not the killers. I couldn’t care less about the slime that cowardly murdered innocents. Show me the runners in the Marathon – I have no idea what they look like. (But thanks to supreme stupidity by the media, I will never be able to forget the pics of a teenage killer.)
Show me the eight year-old boy – I want to identify with him, not the killer. Show me pics of the heroes – the law enforcement personnel who risked their lives to catch these butchers. Show me the guy with the boat who called it in! Show me the MIT Cop who was killed. Tell me about him, his life, his values, his experiences, not the killers.
Our collective Media is making a butcher of innocent children into a “relatable guy.” They are personalizing him. Please, please stop. I challenge you to a paradigm shift starting now. No longer does the media broadcast images of the criminal 24/7 and tell us all, all about his entire life and the lives of his relatives and friends. But rather, investigate, personalize and broadcast images of the innocent victims, the hard working law enforcement and/or military personnel. Tell us stories of their lives, their hopes, their dreams, their reality. Dig deep and deeper still, not into the killer, but in to the victims and heroes.
I won’t be holding my breath. littlegecko
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 3 4 Next View All