H/T Weasel Zippers
H/T Weasel Zippers
David Jacques, publisher of the Roseburg Beacon, told Bill O’Reilly on Monday that the people of Roseburg would not welcome Barack Obama if he came to town to politicize the funerals of the Umpqua College shooting victims.
Madman Chris Harper-Mercer murdered eight students and a teacher last week in a shooting spree on campus.
David Jacques and community leaders, including Douglas County commissioners, the police chief and local sheriff, do not want Obama to come grandstand in Roseburg for political purposes.
Now, there is a Facebook protest page set up to protest Obama in Roseburg.
They rolled out their “Unwelcome Mat.”
From the Defend Roseburg-Deny Barack Obama Facebook Protest page:
The anointed one his majesty king 0bama and the White House have announced a Friday arrival in Roseburg, Oregon in the wake of Oct 1st’s horrific tragedy at UCC.
Polarizing as usual, Mr 0bama has insisted on politicizing the event as a conduit for increased executive orders on gun control via means of his pen, and his phone.
This blatant disrespect of the victims families, the community and the town of Roseburg, Mr 0bama’s administration is flying not just the 747 that is airforce one to Oregon, but a three helicopter team of Sikorsky’s that make up HMX-1, known as Marine one to travel to Roseburg at the taxpayers expense.
We need a lot of people. Please come show your support for Roseburg, not the little man who has no respect for the constitution.
Local activist Casey Runyan is organizing the protest.
UPDATE: (7:30 PM ) 1,900 people have signed up to attend rally to protest Barack Obama.
I’m sure it is.
Tributes have been paid to father-of-four from Bolton Qasim Akram, who was killed in the accident just hours after arriving in the Saudi Arabian city ahead of his first pilgrimage to Mecca.
Mr Akram, who was believed to be 32, and a private hire driver, had been in the Grand Mosque with his parents 50 yards ahead of them when the crane struck.
Shockingly, a British imam and director of the Oxford Islamic Information Centre, Dr Hojjat Ramzy, said he wanted to “congratulate” those who lost their lives for “going straight to heaven without any question”, describing the tragic incident as a “great honor”.
The Independent newspaper quoted him as saying: “Many Muslim pilgrims wish to pass away during the journey of hajj and to have honor of being buried in the holy city of Mecca.
“This is great honor from God that every one wishes for but not many will be granted.”
The Obama administration has intervened in a landmark legal case brought by the American victims of Palestinian terrorists, urging the court to limit restitution for the victims out of fear that a sizable payout could collapse the Palestinian government, according to a copy of the court filing.
Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken argued in a filing to a New York City court that a hefty payout to the victims of Palestinian terror crimes could burden the Palestinian Authority (PA) and interfere in Obama administration efforts to foster peace in the region.
The victims are entitled to as much as $655 million from the PA following the conclusion of a decade-long lawsuit that exposed the Palestinian government’s role in supporting and paying for terror attacks in Israel.
The administration’s intervention in the case has drawn criticism from U.S. lawmakers and some of those affected by the decision.
While the administration supports the right of terror victims to sue in U.S. courts, it remains particularly concerned about the PA’s solvency.
“The United States respectfully urges the Court to carefully consider the impact of its decision on the continued viability of the PA in light of the evidence about its financial situation,” Blinken writes in his “statement of interest.” “An event that deprives the PA of a significant portion of its revenues would likely severely compromise the PA’s ability to operate as a governmental authority.”
Blinken goes on to warn that the case could impact U.S. security interests and its role in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.
“A PA insolvency and collapse would harm current and future U.S.-led efforts to achieve a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict,” Blinken writes.
Representatives to the PA had been lobbying the Justice and State Departments to get involved in the case for some time. The PA maintains that it does not have enough funds to pay a bond requirement and has petitioned the judge in the case to drop it.
However, a lawyer representing the victims argues that if the Palestinian government can continue paying terrorists currently imprisoned in Israeli jails, it can pay the victims of these terror acts.
“We are gratified that the Department of Justice supports the rights of survivors of international terrorism to enforce their rights and collect the judgment, but disappointed that the State Department failed to take any stand against the PLO and PA’s policy of putting convicted terrorists on their payroll as soon as they are jailed,” lawyer Kent Yalowitz was quoted as saying in a statement. “If the PA has enough money to pay convicted terrorists, it has enough to pay the judgment in this case.”
Ron Gould, a plaintiff in the case, told the Washington Free Beacon in an interview that there was no reason for the Obama administration to intervene.
“There was really no reason for them to even get involved,” said Gould, whose daughter Shayna was shot in the chest and nearly killed by Palestinian terrorists. “For the Obama administration to stick their fingers where they don’t belong is unconscionable.”
The PA “still seems to have the money to pay the families of the terrorists on an ongoing basis,” Gould said. “They do have the money to pay the piper for losing the court case.”
Shayna Gould welcomed the administration’s filing in the case, saying it reaffirms the rights of terror victims to have a fair day in court.
However, she called the argument that the PA could be bankrupted as a result of the suit “ironic, considering they pay terrorists on a monthly basis.”
Shayna Gould said the PA had been hinting that the U.S. government would get involved for quite some time
“It was a fear. It was a huge fear,” she said, adding that the PA should be forced to finally pay up.
“They, with pride, give money and rank of the highest honor to terrorists and people who commit murder,” Gould said. “Does that sound like clipping coupons and saving pennies?”
“I have to deal with [the impact of their violence] in my life on a constant basis,” Gould added, explaining that she deals with physical pain on a daily basis since the attack. “There is no limit to our suffering.”
Jewish human rights group B’nai B’rith was also critical of the administration’s intervention.
“There needs to be a price paid for committing acts of terror and the means available to prosecute those responsible,” the group said in a release. “While the victims’ families cannot bring their loved ones back, they can go to the courts to achieve redress.”
Were you under the assumption that the Boston Marathon bombings were an act of terrorism? Maybe it was because just after the bombings, the President said this:
“Any time bombs are used to target innocent civilians it is an act of terror.”
Turns out, if you look into the details, he actually never said it was an act of terrorism. There was much discussion about the whys and wherefores after his statement, and the mincing of the difference between the words “terror” and “terrorism” went on for quite some time.
Now, the Treasury Department has given its imprint on the perspective as well. And they haven’t “certified” it as an “act of terrorism,” either.
The context is the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act, which was passed just after the 9/11 attacks. It’s a federally-administered and underwritten insurance program for terrorism-caused damage, designed to be relatively inexpensive but to compensate policy owners in the event of a man-caused disaster.
Twenty-two Boston-based companies carried that insurance and for pay-out purposes, the attacks have not been classified as acts of terror.
Instead, the law’s details state that insurance losses must exceed $5 million to be certified as terrorism, and so far only $1.9 million in claims have been issued. That actual terrorists blew stuff up, killed people, and caused damage is only part of the equation and not sufficient to make an “act of terrorism” determination. The rest of the critical factors depend on the dollar value.
Whether this detail stems from a crony relationship between the government and the insurance companies, as they write the policies and benefit from the premiums whereas the payouts are taxpayer supported, or just a well-intentioned mistake, is unclear.
Yet the FBI defines terrorism as activities that:
* “Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;”
* “Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and”
* “Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.”
By this definition, the Boston Marathon bombings were unquestionably a terrorist act, and the policy holders should receive the amounts due them. Regardless of whether or not the Treasury Department’s intentions are good, this is a grievous error that must be immediately corrected.
Editor’s note: This article was edited after publication to clarify what kind of federal program it is.
Jumping Joe Biden was in Boston today on the anniversary of the Marathon bombings. Biden told the survivors of last year’s terrorist attack – “It was worth it.”
“To those quote “survivors,” My God, you have survived and you have soared. It was worth… It was worth it. I mean this sincerely, just to hear each of you speak. You’re truly, truly inspiring. I’ve never heard anything so beautiful with what all of you just said.”
Twitchy has reaction.
More… Patty added:
The IRS Scandal involved:
At least 292 conservative groups targeted
At least 5 pro-Israel groups targeted
Constitutional groups targeted
Groups that criticized Obama administration were targeted
At least two pro-life groups targeted
A Texas voting-rights group was targeted
Conservative activists and businesses were targeted
At least one conservative Hispanic group was targeted
IRS continued to target groups even after the scandal was exposed
The Obama FBI will not file charges against the IRS for targeting conservative groups. The agency never once interviewed a single Tea Party group.
The WSJ.com reported:
The Journal reports that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is unlikely to file any criminal charges in the targeting of conservative political organizations by the Internal Revenue Service. Yet Cleta Mitchell, an attorney who represents many of the targets, says that the FBI has never contacted any of her clients to discuss their treatment at the hands of the IRS. “Shouldn’t law enforcement talk to the victims in an investigation?,” she asks in an email. “That’s like investigating a burglary without interviewing the burgled,” notes a Journal editorial…
…Beyond the harassment of Tea Party groups and the leaking of confidential taxpayer data to political opponents, the IRS case also involved senior government officials falsely assuring Congress for a year that there was no targeting. IRS brass then falsely and publicly claimed that the targeting was the work of low-level employees. Yet when it comes to allegations of misleading Congress, the Obama Justice Department was more interested in trying to prosecute baseball pitcher Roger Clemens for comments about steroids than it was in pursuing a case involving the use of the nation’s tax-collecting authority against the President’s opponents.
Autumn Manning, wife of Fort Hood survivor Army Staff Sgt. Shawn Manning, is claiming that the U.S. Department of Defense is “slapping victims with gag orders” and telling family members not to talk to the press following testimony in the trial of Maj. Nidal Hasan.
This prevents survivors from talking about “denial of benefits,” which is still happening after the Obama administration decided to classify the shooting as “workplace violence.” Because of the designation, Fort Hood survivors have been denied combat-related benefits.
Manning later clarified that the DOD’s gag order only applied to witnesses, though she also claims family members were told not to talk to the press.
“[I] will say what I want [to] who I want,” a defiant Manning wrote on Twitter Wednesday.
“I am not in military [and] still have my 1st amendment rights [thank you] very much,” she wrote in another tweet.
Conservative radio host Dana Loesch has been leading the charge on this story. She provides the screengrabs of Manning’s tweets:
We are currently investigating whether “gagging” witnesses in a military trial is a normal occurrence. This story may be updated with additional information.
Speaking at Istanbul, Turkey, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry made a jarring comparison between the victims of the Boston Marathon terror bombs and terror activists from the IHH group who were killed when they attacked IDF forces aboard the Mavi Marmara in 2010.
Kerry told his hosts in Turkey that he understands the pain of the families whose loved ones were killed aboard the Marmara – and added that he can understand their pain well, having just dealt with the families whose loved ones were slain in Boston.
Kerry said in his speech that he hopes the Israeli apology will lead to a thawing of Israel-Turkey relations.
Representatives of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu arrived in Turkey Sunday, for talks on the compensation Israel will pay Turkey for the deaths of the IHH terror activists. The apology was brokered by U.S. President Barack Obama, as part of a rapprochement between Israel and Turkey that may include security cooperation regarding the Iranian nuclear weapons threat.
Three years after the White House arranged a hero’s welcome at the State of the Union address for the Fort Hood police sergeant and her partner who stopped the deadly shooting there, Kimberly Munley says President Obama broke the promise he made to her that the victims would be well taken care of.
“Betrayed is a good word,” former Sgt. Munley told ABC News in a tearful interview to be broadcast tonight on “World News with Diane Sawyer” and “Nightline.”
“Not to the least little bit have the victims been taken care of,” she said. “In fact they’ve been neglected.”
There was no immediate comment from the White House about Munley’s allegations.
Thirteen people were killed, including a pregnant soldier, and 32 others shot in the November 2009 rampage by the accused shooter, Major Nidal Hasan, who now awaits a military trial on charges of premeditated murder and attempted murder.
Tonight’s broadcast report also includes dramatic new video, obtained by ABC News, taken in the immediate aftermath of the shooting, capturing the chaos and terror of the day.
Munley, since laid off from her job with the base’s civilian police force, was shot three times as she and her partner, Sgt. Mark Todd, confronted Hasan, who witnesses said had shouted “Allahu Akbar” as he opened fire on soldiers being processed for deployment to Afghanistan.
As Munley lay wounded, Todd fired the five bullets credited with bringing Hasan down.
Despite extensive evidence that Hasan was in communication with al Qaeda leader Anwar al-Awlaki prior to the attack, the military has denied the victims a Purple Heart and is treating the incident as “workplace violence” instead of “combat related” or terrorism.
Al-Awlaki has since been killed in a U.S. drone attack in Yemen, in what was termed a major victory in the U.S. efforts against al Qaeda.
Munley and dozens of other victims have now filed a lawsuit against the military alleging the “workplace violence” designation means the Fort Hood victims are receiving lower priority access to medical care as veterans, and a loss of financial benefits available to those who injuries are classified as “combat related.”
Some of the victims “had to find civilian doctors to get proper medical treatment” and the military has not assigned liaison officers to help them coordinate their recovery, said the group’s lawyer, Reed Rubinstein.
“There’s a substantial number of very serious, crippling cases of post-traumatic stress disorder exacerbated, frankly, by what the Army and the Defense Department did in this case,” said Rubinstein. “We have a couple of cases in which the soldiers’ command accused the soldiers of malingering, and would say things to them that Fort Hood really wasn’t so bad, it wasn’t combat.”
A spokesperson for the Army said its policy is not to comment on pending litigation, but that it is “not true” any of the military victims have been neglected and that it has no control over the guidelines of the Veterans Administration.
Secretary of the Army John McHugh told ABC News he was unaware of any specific complaints from the Fort Hood victims, even though he is a named defendant in the lawsuit filed last November which specifically details the plight of many of them.
“If a soldier feels ignored, then we need to know about it on a case by case basis,” McHugh told ABC News. “It is not our intent to have two levels of care for people who are wounded by whatever means in uniform.”
Some of the victims in the lawsuit believe the Army Secretary and others are purposely ignoring their cases out of political correctness.
“These guys play stupid every time they’re asked a question about it, they pretend like they have no clue,” said Shawn Manning, who was shot six times that day at Fort Hood. Two of the bullets remain in his leg and spine, he said.
“It was no different than an insurgent in Iraq or Afghanistan trying to kill us,” said Manning, who was twice deployed to Iraq and had to retire from the military because of his injuries.
An Army review board initially classified Manning’s injuries as “combat related,” but that finding was later overruled by higher-ups in the Army.
Manning says the “workplace violence” designation has cost him almost $70,000 in benefits that would have been available if his injuries were classified as “combat related.”
“Basically, they’re treating us like I was downtown and I got hit by a car,” he told ABC News.
For Alonzo Lunsford, who was shot seven times at Fort Hood and blinded in one eye, the military’s treatment is deeply hurtful.
“It’s a slap in the face, not only for me but for all of the 32 that wore the uniform that day,” he told ABC News.
Lunsford’s medical records show his injuries were determined to be “in the line of duty” but neither he nor any of the other soldiers shot or killed at Fort Hood is eligible for the Purple Heart under the Department of Defense’s current policy for decorations and awards.
Army Secretary McHugh says awarding Purple Hearts could adversely affect the trial of Major Hasan.
“To award a Purple Heart, it has to be done by a foreign terrorist element,” said McHugh. “So to declare that soldier a foreign terrorist, we are told, I’m not an attorney and I don’t run the Justice Department, but we’re told would have a profound effect on the ability to conduct the trial.”
Members of Congress, including the chairman of the House Homeland Security committee, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, say they will introduce legislation to force the military and the Obama administration to give the wounded and dead the recognition and honors they deserve.
“It was clearly an act of terrorism that occurred that day, there’s no question in my mind,” McCaul told ABC News. “I think the victims should be treated as such.”
Former Sgt. Munley says she now believes the White House used her for political advantage in arranging for her to sit next to Michelle Obama during the President’s State of the Union address in 2010.
Munley says she has no hesitation now speaking out against the President or taking part in the lawsuit, because she wants to help the others who were shot that day and continue to suffer.
“We got tired of being neglected. So this was our last resort and I’m not ashamed of it a bit,” said Munley. She is also raising money for a movie about Fort Hood, and says some of the proceeds will go to the victims.