May 20th, 2013
4 days ago

TheBlaze Magazine: Government rule vs. home schoolHome-schooling in America is a proven success, but the Left continues to wage war against home education. Their attacks aren’t new—Progressives first made the case in the early 20th century that government control trumps the rights of parents.

What will the assault look like in the 21st century?

Plus, meet new brand of artists who are drawing upon faith and freedom to give a traditional tone to modern art and send a message about the America they love.

Get the Magazine today.

Follow Chris Field on Twitter

Follow Chris Field on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

‘Bigoted, Religious [Zealots]‘: High School Senior Allegedly Expelled, Charged With Felonies Over Gay Relationship With ‘Consenting’ Fellow Student

White House: ‘Irrelevant Fact’ Where Obama Was During Benghazi

CNN Poll: Obama’s Approval Rating Unchanged Since Scandals Hit

Report: Obama Administration Apologizes for Another National Security Leak

‘Arrogance…Abuse of Power…Rotten to the Core’: Paul Ryan Steamed Over IRS, Benghazi

TheBlaze.com – Blog

May 17th, 2013
One week ago

On CBS Thursday morning, Face the Nation anchor Bob Schieffer said the three scandals engulfing Washington this week are “a case of ‘is anybody home.’” Continue reading »

May 15th, 2013
9 days ago

NRO’s Andrew Johnson tips us off to this gem:

The government is simply too big for President Obama to keep track of all the wrongdoing taking place on his watch, his former senior adviser, David Axelrod, told MSNBC. “Part of being president is there’s so much beneath you that you can’t know because the government is so vast,” he explained.

WATCH:

Here’s a novel idea: If the federal bureaucracy is “too vast” for the President to manage, wouldn’t it make sense to shrink the government rather than grow it?  Food for thought…

At another point in the same interview, Axelrod defended the Department of Justice’s decision to track the phones of reporters in order to plug a intel leak.  Madeleine has more on that here.

Follow Meredith Jessup on Twitter

Follow Meredith Jessup on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

German Homeschooling Family’s Request for Asylum Denied by the U.S. Government

Another Teen Atheist Successfully Gets 10 Commandments Removed at His High School

White Family (Including 14-Year-Old Daughter) Reportedly Attacked for Being in the ‘Wrong Neighborhood’ of Baton Rouge

How High Up Does This Go? New Report Implicates Washington Officials in IRS Scandal

The Most Transparent Administration Ever: This Redacted Freedom of Information Request Is Unbelievable

TheBlaze.com – Blog

April 29th, 2013
25 days ago
We have written about the issues we have with the manhunt in Boston. In the following article, Bob Livingston, further illustrates the problems we have with the government. 

When the government gets blatantly caught in lies throughout the entire situation, it should give the average thinking person pause.  If they will lie about something so small (two men and two bombs), can we depend on anything they say? Is government setting us up for a much larger event? 

Please take a few minutes and read Bob’s article and then let us know what you think.

Conservative Tom

Boston And More Government Lies

April 29, 2013 by  
Boston And More Government Lies
UPI
A SWAT team sniper in an armored vehicle looks down Bigelow Avenue during a manhunt for one of the two Boston Marathon bombing suspects on April 19.
The Saudi Arabian “person of interest” who was hospitalized with serious injuries and then held under guard at a hospital because he was suspected of playing a part in the Boston Marathon bombing is just a college student who happened to be enjoying the annual spectacle.
Two Chechnyan brothers — one a naturalized U.S. citizen — who heretofore were unknown to the U.S. security apparatus, became radicalized for unknown reasons. Using instructions found online, they fabricated bombs using kitchen utensils, hardware junk and fireworks, concealed them in a backpack and duffle bag and detonated them near the finish line of the race.
Days later, after the FBI solicited the help of the public in identifying two men in grainy video images, the two Chechnyan brothers came out of hiding, killed an MIT police officer in cold blood in an effort to steal his sidearm, car jacked an Asian man, drove to a convenience store and robbed it, then engaged in a firefight with police. The two men were armed with a small arsenal of five pipe bombs, an M-4 carbine, two handguns and a BB gun. They planned to kill as many people as they could and then, depending on who is talking, blow up New York or party there, authorities said.
During the early morning hours of Friday, April 19, the two men battled with police, exchanging gunfire and exploding at least one of their bombs. At least 200 rounds were fired by the cops. The suspects fired back 80 or more at police. The older brother, identified as Tamerlan Tsarnaev, was apprehended when he ran toward police while firing his weapon. Tamerlan was on the ground being handcuffed by police when younger brother Dzhokhar — by all accounts of friends a nice and friendly guy who had never expressed jihadist opinions — drove over him in a stolen SUV, dragging the body at least 30 feet before it became disentangled from the vehicle’s undercarriage.
This violent exchange, in which police believe they wounded Dzhokhar, led to a voluntary lockdown of the town of Watertown, part of greater Boston. Residents and business owners were encouraged but not forced to stay inside all of Friday while police, FBI and National Guard troops and equipment scoured the neighborhood for the criminal terrorist. Police tactical units, armed in full SWAT or military gear conducted house-to-house searches, asking people to exit their homes at gunpoint, strongly encouraging them (with threats) to raise their hands (even if they were of different sex, race and age of the known suspect) and be frisked.
The suspect was finally located hiding in a boat in a Watertown backyard by the boat’s owner, who had noticed the tarp covering the boat was loose. Peering beneath the tarp, the homeowner saw the suspect, bleeding and asleep or unconscious, and called police.
Well-armed and fitted with an explosive vest, the suspect posed grave risk to law enforcement. So they surrounded the area, engaged in another firefight with him and finally apprehended him. Having been injured in the throat, the suspect is unable to talk, but he did manage to confess to the plot before being read his Miranda rights by a Boston judge.
As best I can tell, this is the official narrative of the Boston Marathon bombing. It is the story the FBI and the rest of government wants you to believe. Because it’s coming from the FBI and being parroted by the government propaganda machine mainstream media, it must be the truth. The masses have accepted it as such and have now moved on to more important interests like the NBA playoffs, the NFL draft, “American Idol” or some other mindless, inconsequential pursuit.
However, now we — at least those of us who pay attention — know, thanks to Glenn Beck, the Saudi person of interest is not just some innocent bystander after all.
Just hours after the April 15 bombing, Abdul Rahman Ali Alharbi was put on a terror watch list and had an event file created that indicated he was armed and dangerous; and actions began that would lead to his deportation. Alharbi, who is related to a number of terrorists now residing in Gitmo and/or listed as part of al-Qaida, was admitted to the United States under a “special advisory opinion,” indicating someone pulled some strings for him. His strings go a long way — all the way to the White House, where Alharbi was a frequent visitor (seven times since 2009). His file contained one prior event, indicating he was already in the terrorism watch list system. Yet even though he’s marked as a terrorist, he was allowed in. Perhaps that explains Michelle Obama’s hospital visit. Alharbi and the Obamas are friends.
After news of his possible deportation leaked, government officials backtracked. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano refused to answer questions from a Congressman about Alharbi. An Immigration and Customs Enforcement official told Beck a different Saudi was in custody but not connected to the bombing.
Someone altered Alharbi’s file on April 17 in a way that disassociated him from the bombing, according to Beck, but an original had been printed out and saved. The change happened around the time that first Secretary of State John Kerry and then President Barack Obama met with the Saudi foreign minister — a meeting that wasn’t on Obama’s schedule.
There are photographs on the Internet that purport to show Alharbi with two other Saudisnear the bomb site.
If the government will lie about who Alharbi is and whether his is a suspect, what else about the official narrative is a lie?
Despite initial claims by the FBI that included a request to help identify the two men in the video, the Tsarnaev brothers have been known to that agency and the CIA for some time. According to their mother, the FBI interviewed them five years ago. The CIA was warned about Tamerlan by Russian authorities almost two years ago. He was on at least two terrorist watch lists. He was flagged so that his travel outside the U.S. would create an alert. They may have been so well-known to the government security apparatus that they were, in fact, double agents.
If the FBI will lie about knowing who the suspects were, what other portions of the story are false?
Police begin to look pretty incompetent if they are having a shootout involving dozens of police officers and just two suspects if the suspects escape, even if the suspects are armed with several weapons. But now we know that the pair did not have an arsenal, as first reported, but only one Ruger 9 mm handgun.
If police will lie about the weapons the pair had and what happened during the shootout, what else are they lying about?
The doctor who first examined Tamerlan said the suspect was in cardiac arrest when he was brought to the emergency room. The doctor described him as suffering from gunshot wounds and a possible blast injury to the trunk that included thermal burns. No mention was made of injuries sustained from being run over by a car. A witness to the shootout who took photographs out his window said Dzhokhar drove through the police barricade, striking two police cars as he did. He did not mention Tamerlan being run over.
If the police will lie about Tamerlan’s cause of death, what else are they lying about?
Police fired dozens of rounds at the boat in which Dzhokhar was hiding. He came out of the boat with a wound to the throat. The MSM reports it was a wound so serious it may leave him unable to speak. It may have been a suicide attempt, police say. Except, he wasn’t armed. He didn’t have a suicide vest. USA Today says this “undercuts initial accounts that the 19-year-old university student was heavily armed, had shot at police and possibly had an explosive device.” And the wound was small and more like a knife cut or a shrapnel wound, according to one of the SWAT team members who arrested Dzhokhar. And as Robert Wenzel notes, notice the reaction of other SWAT members at about 4:50 on the video as the man speaking describes the cut. Did he deviate from the official narrative?
If police will lie about the weapons Dzhokhar had and the extent of his injuries, how much of the rest of the narrative is a lie?
As Jon Rappoport points out, the government’s bomb narrative is fishy. The piece of metal that was purported to be remains of a pressure cooker bomb shows no evidence of having contained shrapnel. The bomb blast was designed to stay low, indicating a level of sophistication far above reading a how-to article on an al-Qaida website.
Official information about Craft operatives who were seen before the explosions, some of them walking around with radiation detectors, is likewise questionable, not that the MSM and their mindless watchers are questioning it. Runners report seeing bomb-sniffing dogs being used before the event and being told a drill was being conducted. Boston police claim there was no drill. More lies!
The FBI claims it’s looking for other members of the Tsarnaev’s terror cell. Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick insists they acted alone. It can’t be both, but no one outside of alternative media is asking which it is.
The FBI, the CIA and other non-government organizations (NGOs) use patsies to stage terror events. Even Obama mouthpiece The New York Times has outed the FBI for staging terror attacks so it could swoop in at the last minute and “save” Americans from attacks that would not have happened without FBI help. They have long been known to lie to advance their agendas: Aurora, Colo.; Newtown; Waco; Ruby Ridge; Oklahoma City; 9/11; Gulf of Tonkin;USS Liberty — the “official” stories on all these are lies.
Yet the people take what government says as gospel and move on. Normalcy bias, or perhaps psychosis, keeps them asleep and happy and thinking there is a government intending to keep them safe. That way, they’re not distracted from their television shows, their iPads or their sporting events.

Conservative Musings

April 26th, 2013
28 days ago
Will a bill to limit government agency munitions purchases be successful?  We hope so as it is inconceivable that the government needs as much materiel that it has ordered. 

Guns, ammo and combat vehicles in the hands of domestic non-law enforcement agencies is a recipe for disaster and abuse of the citizenry.  We need to get this stopped immediately!   

Conservative Tom

GOP LAWMAKERS HOPE TO COMBAT AMMUNITION STOCKPILING BY GOV’T AGENCIES WITH AMMO ACT

GOP Lawmakers Hope to Cut Back on Ammo Purchases by Government Agencies With AMMO Act
Credit: Getty Images
Republicans in the Senate and House are expected to introduce a joint bill Friday that would limit the amount of ammunition that federal agencies are allowed to buy and stockpile over the next six months, the Washington Free Beacon reports.
The bill, titled the Ammunition Management for More Accountability or “AMMO” Act, is being proposed after several lawmakers have voiced concerns about some federal agencies, like the Department of Homeland Security, seemingly stockpiling large quantities of ammo.
“DHS, for instance, has placed two-years worth of ammunition, or nearly 247 million rounds, in its inventory,” the Free Beacon notes.
In a statement provided to the Washington Free Beacon, one of the bill’s co-sponsors, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), said federal agencies must provide more “transparency and accountability” in regards to its “stockpiles of ammunition.”
“President Obama has been adamant about curbing law-abiding Americans’ access and opportunities to exercise their Second Amendment rights…One way the Obama administration is able to do this is by limiting what’s available in the market with federal agencies purchasing unnecessary stockpiles of ammunition,” the statement adds.
More from the Free Beacon:
[T]he legislation would prevent all government agencies except for the Defense Department from purchasing and storing what lawmakers say is an excess amount of ammunition.
The bill’s reach would include DHS and U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), two agencies that have found themselves at the center of the ammo controversy.
“As the public learned in a House committee hearing this week, the Department of Homeland Security has two years worth of ammo on hand and allots nearly 1,000 more rounds of ammunition for DHS officers than is used on average by our Army officers,” Inhofe said. “The AMMO Act of 2013 will enforce transparency and accountability of federal agencies’ ammunition supply while also protecting law-abiding citizens access to these resources.”
An agency covered by the legislation would not be permitted to purchase or store more ammunition than that agency retained on average between 2001 and 2009, according to an advance copy of the legislation provided to the Free Beacon.
Additionally, the AMMO Act would encourage the Government Accountability Office to audit federal agencies’ ammo purchases.
“The Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report regarding the purchasing of ammunition by agencies, which shall include an assessment of the effect of the purchasing of ammunition by agencies on the supply of ammunition available to the public,” the bill reads, according to a copy reviewed by the Free Beacon.
There have been more concerns over reports of DHS’s plan to purchase another 750 million rounds of ammunition over the next five years, despite having a two-year stockpile saved up. Meanwhile, gun shops across the country are reporting ammunition shortages.

Conservative Musings

April 25th, 2013
29 days ago

Ambassador James Woolsey nails the government when he says they did not use the tools available to stop the Boston bombers. He is completely correct and we should be very concerned that, so far, it has been “business as usual.”  No one has been fired, there have been hearings but there has been no resolution to another failure of our law enforcement.  


What makes this case especially frustrating is the government was warned by Russia that Tamerlan Tsarnaev was bad news. Yes, the FBI did interview him, but he did not stay on any “watch list” and was allowed to fly. He left the country for six months and again, that did not trigger any suspicions when he came back. He and his family were on welfare, no one wondered. His brother had a jihad license plate and that did not attract any attention. There are just too many misses to not start wondering if this was purposeful.

All of these events show a government that is not interested in really protecting us. If we are to believe them, that is one of their primary goals. If so, they failed terribly. How many other times have they just gotten lucky? One notable example is the Times Square bomber whose bomb did not ignite, otherwise, who knows how many would have died or been injured.

We have to make government accountable. When they get a lead, there must be a list that they go onto. Anyone on the list must stay there unless it can be shown that there is no risk.  We need to tighten immigration rules and visa administration. No longer should people be able to come to this country and overstay their visa and not be punished. We cannot have open immigration. All immigrants should be subjected to intense investigations into their background, their friends and their attitude toward the United States.  No resident alien should be able to become a citizen until they pass all FBI investigations without a hitch, pass a history of the United States test and be able to communicate fluently in English. Additionally, they must disavow any loyalty to their previous country, no split loyalties. The days of getting a free pass MUST be over.

Unless we take strong and disciplined action, this country will become one where terrorist events occur on a monthly basis. That is not anywhere we would want to live.

Conservative Tom 

Former CIA Director: Law Enforcement Didn’t Use Available Tools to Monitor Bombing Suspect

Wednesday, 24 Apr 2013 08:09 PM
By Paul Scicchitano and Kathleen Walter
Share:
More . . .
A    A   |
   Email Us   |
   Print   |

Ambassador James Woolsey, who ran the CIA under President Clinton, tells Newsmax TV that U.S. law enforcement appears to have failed to use all of the tools at its disposal to monitor Boston Marathon bombing suspect Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

“This is not an intelligence matter,” said Woolsey in an exclusive interview on Wednesday. “This is a law enforcement matter. It’s not the CIA’s business to try to prevent crime in the United States or arrest people or any of that.”

While the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed the 26-year-old bombing suspect, who was killed in last week’s dramatic shootout with police, they presumably concluded that the older brother did not pose a danger or risk to the United States.

Woolsey, who now serves as the chairman of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said that the FBI might have been able to obtain a warrant under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to keep a watchful eye on Tsarnaev, particularly since Russian authorities had attempted to alert the U.S. to his ties with radical Islam.

“The Bureau might have gotten a warrant from a FISA court and been able to follow what Tamerlan was doing for several years given the fact that the Russians had taken the trouble to warn us about him,” Woolsey explained. “I don’t know why they didn’t’ use the FISA warrant. I don’t know why they closed the investigation but it doesn’t look to me as if we — the law enforcement side — used the tools that they had under American law.”

Meanwhile, he said, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police “did a much better job” of keeping tabs on two unrelated suspects who allegedly had been plotting to blow up a train bound from Toronto to New York.

“They’d been keeping up with them for a couple of years and they decided to move and to arrest them, presumably for conspiracy, because they were worried that they might take action,” said Woolsey, who was director of America’s top spy agency from 1993 to 1995.

“The Canadians didn’t close their file after they started looking into it,” he observed. “They kept at it.”

Woolsey said he could not fault the CIA since it is not the agency’s job to watch American citizens on U.S. soil.

“The CIA doesn’t spy on people in the United States,” he explained. “If anybody is going to have an informant inside an organization here in the US to keep them up to speed on what a potential terrorist might do in the US, that’s law enforcement.”

He praised New York City Police Commissioner Ray Kelly for being “very aggressive” in tracking down potential threats to his city.

“They run operations in New York to keep track of what’s going on in potential terrorists and they do a very good job of it,” according to Woolsey, who has been labeled a neoconservative Democrat.

“What happened in 9/11 was that there was not good communication between the CIA and the FBI,” he recalled. “That’s true, but that detailed communication was in very many ways barred by a Justice Department ruling that was put out during the Clinton administration that build a so-called Chinese wall not only between intelligence and law enforcement, but between parts of the FBI to where the people doing criminal investigations in the bureau were not able to talk to the people who were doing counterintelligence.”

He said it was a “very close call” as to whether the Obama administration should have treated surviving suspect, 19-year-old Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as an enemy combatant.

Woolsey could only recall one case of U.S. citizens being arrested, prosecuted, and executed on American soil during World War II.

“World War II was a different kind of war than we are in now and some people would say we’re really at peace and these are just isolated incidents,” he said. “And so we ought to deal with each terrorist as if he were a bank robber and give him all the rights that an American criminal defendant has, whereas an illegal combatant overseas, say in Afghanistan today, obviously does not have those kinds of rights.”

While the Tsarnaev brothers may have posed a legal tightrope for law enforcement officials, the Obama administration has stretched “political correctness” in a number of cases, according to Woolsey.

“The administration really, really stretches the political correctness there to try to make it look as if they’ve already won the war on terror and this is just something else,” he said, pointing to the case of the Ft. Hood shooter, whom the administration classified under workplace violence.

“He has a business card that effectively calls himself a jihadi, and when he kills the 13 soldiers at Ft. Hood, he’s shouting, ‘Allahu Akbar,’” Woolsey recalls. “Now, it’s pretty hard to think of that as workplace violence but that’s what the administration has done and the report on Major Hasan never even mentioned the words ‘Islam,’ ‘jihad,’ or anything like that.”

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/boston-marathon-bombing-suspect/2013/04/24/id/501251?s=al&promo_code=13468-1#ixzz2RVvbrOQ0
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Conservative Musings

April 20th, 2013
34 days ago
The FBI interviewed the older Boston Bomber in 2011 after information was received about him from another country and did not deport him after he had a domestic violence conviction in 2009. Where is our government? Where is the personal responsibility of those who are supposed to be protecting us? How many others are waiting in the wings to attack us? Does our government even care about its citizens?

We asked the same questions after 9/11 and it appears as if thirteen years later, we still have not learned our lessons. Will we ever? It is doubtful.

Government has become so large and insulated from citizen action, that no one is ever held responsible.  No one loses their job when things get screwed up. This is especially true for the higher-ups.  

We are still waiting for explanations for Fast and Furious and Benghazi.  We predict that we will never have an answer. Will anyone be punished for missing the Boston bomber’s intentions in 2011 or the lack of attention to his conviction two years prior? No, the government does not do that.  

When government is no longer responsible to its citizens, it loses touch, it protects itself and those who work for it.  It is at that point the government can do anything, justify any action. We are there now.

As I listened to the President last night, he briefly mentioned citizen input into the investigation while lauding “great police and investigative” work done by government officials. However, the initial identification of the second bomber was not done by any police official but rather by an eye witness who was hurt by the very bomb the terrorist has put down feet from him.  Additionally, the capture and arrest of the second bomber occurred after a citizen found him hiding in a boat in his back yard. The police would not have found him without the aid of this gentlemen as they had earlier in the day presumed that he had left the area.  

As this situation dramatically illustrates, the police are not psychic and need input. Yet government agents always discount the importance of the information they receive from the citizens and praise themselves for their brilliant work.

The Boston bomber story is one that dramatically illustrates the incompetency of government to protect us even when given the information (same thing happened with the 9/11 conspirators and the underwear bomber.) Yet when the tragedy does occur, they laud themselves with praise for solving the case. Isn’t it time that they get their priorities right?

Conservative Tom




FBI Interviewed Boston Bombing Suspect in 2011

Friday, 19 Apr 2013 10:15 PM
Share:
More . . .
A    A   |
   Email Us   |
   Print   |

WASHINGTON — The FBI and other law enforcement agencies were aware of at least one of the Boston terror suspects for several years, and even failed to deport him after a domestic violence conviction in 2009.

The FBI in 2011 interviewed one of the brothers suspected in the deadly Boston Marathon bombings, a disclosure that raises questions about whether the government missed potential warning signs about the men’s behavior.

The brothers had not been under surveillance as possible militants, U.S. government officials said. But the FBI said in a statement on Friday that in 2011 it interviewed Tamerlan at the request of a foreign government, which it did not identify.

“The request stated that it was based on information that he was a follower of radical Islam and a strong believer, and that he had changed drastically since 2010 as he prepared to leave the United States for travel to the country’s region to join unspecified underground groups,” the FBI statement said.

The matter was closed because interviews with Tamerlan and family members “did not find any terrorism activity, domestic or foreign”.Tamerlan Tsarnaev was killed early Friday in Boston after an overnight shootout with police. His younger brother, Dzhokhar, was taken into custody on Friday evening in the Boston suburb of Watertown after a dramatic, day-long manhunt, Boston police said.

Bleeding and in serious condition, Dzhokhar is in a Boston hospital, a Massachusetts State Police spokesman said.

A spokeswoman for Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston, Kelly Lawman, confirmed on Saturday that Tsarnaev was being treated there, but declined comment on his condition.

The revelation that the elder Tsarnaev was on U.S. law enforcement authorities’ radar screens seemed likely to raise uncomfortable questions for the Obama administration about whether it could have done anything to detect and stop the plot.
“It’s new information to me and it’s very disturbing that he’s on the FBI radar screen,” Rep. Michael McCaul, Texas Republican and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, said on CNN late Friday.

In an interview with Russian state television broadcaster RT, the mother of the bombing brothers said Tamerlan, the older of the two suspects, had been under FBI surveillance for at least three years.

Tamerlan Tsarnaev, 26, who was killed in a shootout with police a day before his brother’s capture yesterday, was accessing extremist sites and was closely monitored by the FBI, Zubeidat Tsarnaeva said in a phone interview in English from Makhachkala, in the southern Russian region of Dagestan, posted on the channel’s website.

“My son would never do this,” Tsarnaeva said. “He was controlled by the FBI for three to five years, they knew what my son was doing, they knew what actions, on what sites on the Internet he was going,” she said. “So how could this happen? They were controlling every step of his.”

Tsarnaeva, whose younger son Dzhokar, 19, was captured after an almost 24-hour manhunt that shut down Boston and surrounding cities, said she had been interviewed by Federal Bureau of Investigation agents about Tamerlan, who had described him as an “extremist leader.”

The brothers’ father, Anzor, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal, said he was present when the FBI interviewed Tamerlan in Cambridge. He said they visited for what they called “prevention” activities.

“They said: ‘We know what sites you are on, we know where you are calling, we know everything about you. Everything,’” he said as cited in the interview.

Tamerlan, a legal resident of the U.S., flew out of the country on a flight bound for Russia in January 2012 and may not have returned until July, said two law enforcement officials briefed on his travel.

U.S. intelligence agencies reviewing international communications and other terrorism intelligence found no signs that the suspected bombers were members of, or inspired by, any foreign terror group, said a U.S. official who asked not to be identified because those matters are classified.

The Tsarnaev brothers and their two sisters moved to the Dagestan region of Russia in October 2001 from the central Asian nation of Kyrgyzstan as refugees, and left for the U.S in March 2002, said Emirmagomed Davudov, director of Gimnasium Number 1 in Dagestan, where Tamerlan went to the seventh grade and Dzhokhar to first grade.

Ruslan Tsarni, their uncle in Gaithersburg, Maryland, said his brother’s children arrived in Cambridge when they immigrated in 2003. Asked for a possible motive for the attacks, Tsarni said they were “losers not being able to settle themselves and thereby just hating everybody who did.”

National security and law enforcement authorities said on earlier Friday that they had not turned up any evidence that the Tsarnaevs had contacts with al Qaeda or other militants overseas.

The brothers were in the United States legally. But Tamerlan Tsarnaev could have been deported after an alleged domestic violence arrest in 2009, the website Judicial Watch reports. It is unclear whether Tsarnaev was convicted in the case, but the arrest alone would have been sufficient for deportation, the site reports.

Tsarnaev came to this country in 2006 on a tourist visa, which means his alleged crime occurred within his first five years in the U.S.

According to Federal Immigration Law, anyone who commits a crime of “moral turpitude,”  including violent crimes such as assault and battery, during the first five years after being admitted to the country can be deported if the crime was punishable by a one-year jail sentence.
Violent plots involving a single individual or small groups who self-radicalize and have minimal dealings with other militants can be extremely difficult to detect in advance, according to U.S. counterterrorism officials and private experts.The revelation about the FBI contacts with the elder Tsarnaev came as U.S. officials told Reuters that investigators are scouring government data banks to determine if spy and police agencies missed potential clues that might have alerted them to the two brothers, originally from the Russian republic of Chechnya.
Another top priority for investigators is to determine whether the brothers had any confederates either inside the United States or overseas, one U.S. official said. This official and others spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation.
Three people were taken into custody for questioning in New Bedford, Massachusetts, police said on Friday. Two men and a woman are being questioned by the FBI “on the assumption there is an affiliation with” Tsarnaev, Lieutenant Robert Richard of the New Bedford Police said.
One official said the possibility that the U.S. government had information that should have raised questions about the Tsarnaev brothers before the attack could not be ruled out. Other officials said they were unaware that such material had turned up.
In several recent cases, U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies failed to put together clues that, in hindsight, might have led them to pre-empt a plot.
In 2009, U.S. Army Maj. Nidal Hassan killed 13 people and wounded another 32 at Fort Hood, Texas. Prior to the shooting spree, Hassan had email contacts with Anwar al-Awlaki, the U.S.-born cleric and leader of al Qaida’s affiliate in Yemen who was later killed in a U.S. drone strike.
U.S. authorities had investigated Hassan’s emails, but concluded they posed no threat of violence.
The father of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the so-called “underwear bomber” who tried to bring down a U.S. jetliner over Detroit on Christmas Day 2009, reported suspicions about his son’s activities to the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria. But Abdulmutallab’s U.S. visa was never revoked.
A report by the Senate intelligence committee heavily criticized U.S. intelligence agencies for failing to act on available information in that case.
But Brian Jenkins, a respected terrorism expert at the RAND Corp., dismissed the idea that the Boston bombings represented an intelligence failure.
People will inevitably ask, “did we miss something in intelligence?” said Jenkins, speaking before the news of the 2011 FBI interview with Tamerlan Tsarnaev become public.
“Some people will label it an ‘intelligence failure.’ But that’s because people have come to expect 100 percent security,” he said.
© 2013 Thomson/Reuters. All rights reserved.

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Headline/fbi-interviewed-bombing-suspect/2013/04/19/id/500471?s=al&promo_code=13381-1#ixzz2R1xTwlSZ
Urgent: Should Obamacare Be Repealed? Vote Here Now!

Conservative Musings

April 6th, 2013
48 days ago

For a guy who routinely mocks conservatives for favoring small-government policies, Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart certainly seemed shocked last night by the ineffectiveness of one of the most notoriously lousy big-government programs.

The Department of Veterans Affairs is just one of many examples of government bureaucracy bogged down in inefficiency and drowning in red tape. In a segment called “Red Tape Diaries,” The Daily Show looks at the incompetence and ineptitude driving the VA into the ground and leaving our veterans out in the cold:

Yet despite the agency’s mind-numbing failure, liberals like Stewart reliably more government intervention in other areas, including business and health care. Go figure.

Follow Meredith Jessup on Twitter

Follow Meredith Jessup on Facebook

Read more stories from TheBlaze

N.Y. Dad’s Pistol License Suspended Over Something His 10-Year-Old Son Said — and It Could Be 8 Years Before He Gets It Back

Cringe-Inducing: MSNBC Host Uses Young Daughter to Push Gay Marriage, Asks Her If She’d ‘Marry a Girl’

Graphic: Dad Brutally Whips Daughters as Punishment for ‘Twerking’ Video

What Did Charles Krauthammer Say About Obama That Shocked a Fox Panel Into Silence?

Megyn Kelly Hits Back at Bill O’Reilly’s Critics Amid ‘Thump the Bible’ Gay Marriage Controversy: ‘I’m Not Kissing Your Butt’

TheBlaze.com – Blog

March 22nd, 2013
63 days ago
Finally some of our legislators are starting to ask questions. We hope they give us the answers we need, however, that is doubtful. If our paranoid fears are on target, all we will get is more stonewalling. Time is going to tell.

Conservative Musings

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Members of Congress are demanding the Obama administration explain why it is stockpiling a huge arsenal of ammunition and weapons.
The Department of Homeland Security bought more than 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition over the last year, as well as thousands of armored vehicles.
Rep. Timothy Huelscamp, R-Kan., wants to know what DHS plans to do with all that firepower, but he can’t get an answer.
A reporter for We Are Change asked Huelscamp at the Conservative Political Action Conference last week why DHS needs weapons of war.
“They have no answer for that question. They refuse to answer to answer that,” Huelscamp said.
“I’ve got a list of questions of various agencies about multiple things. Far from being the most transparent administration in the world, they are the most closed-nature, opaque and they refuse to let us know what is going on, so I don’t have an answer for that. And multiple members of Congress are asking those questions,” he added.
Huelscamp said he plans to apply pressure to get an answer: “It comes down to during the budget process, during the appropriations process, are we willing to hold DHS’s feet to the fire? We’re going to find out. I say we don’t fund them ’til we get an answer.”
Rep. Leonard Lance, R-N.J., also wants answers, and WND has reported that he is demanding an explanation of DHS’s bullet buys from Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
“I think Congress should ask the department about both of those issues, and I would like a full explanation as to why that has been done, and I have every confidence that the oversight committee … should ask those questions,” said Lance, adding that he shared a belief “that Congress has a responsibility to ask Secretary Napolitano as to exactly why these purchases have occurred.”
As WND reported, the Department of Homeland Security has argued that it is buying in bulk to save money, explaining it uses as many as 15 million rounds a year for training law enforcement agents.
But the 1.6 billion rounds of ammo would be enough for more than 100 years of training, or, more ominously, enough to fight a war for more than 20 years. It would also be enough to shoot every American more than five times.
Forbes columnist Benko, who worked for two years in the U.S. Department of Energy’s general counsel’s office in its procurement and finance division, doubts the government’s explanation.
“To claim that it’s to ‘get a low price’ for a ridiculously wasteful amount is an argument that could only fool a career civil servant,” he writes.
Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said she believes the federal government is building an arsenal to prepare for the day the country goes bankrupt. Last month, she wrote on her Facebook page: “If we are going to wet our proverbial pants over 0.3% in annual spending cuts when we’re running up trillion dollar annual deficits, then we’re done. Put a fork in us. We’re finished. We’re going to default eventually and that’s why the feds are stockpiling bullets in case of civil unrest.”
The prospect of civil unrest puts a chilling spin on an ominous remark then-candidate Barack Obama made in a Colorado campaign speech in July 2008.
“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded,” said then-candidate Obama.
Even the far-left is worried by the feds’ growing power.
WND reported four days ago that Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Code Pink, a left-wing “peace and social justice movement” known for its colorful marches and protests, told WABC host Aaron Klein the potential for the Obama administration to abuse its growing domestic police power is “extremely troubling.”
Klein asked Benjamin, author of “Drone Warfare: Killing by Remote Control,” if she was concerned that military-style drones now authorized to fly over U.S. skies could be used against American citizens, the same question that prompted U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., to filibuster in the Senate earlier this month.
“Very much so,” Benjamin replied. “We see a militarization of the U.S. police forces here in the United States, and it’s a very troubling tendency.”
Furthermore, Benjamin charged she was “upset” that liberal Democrats – who might question and fight the federal government’s growing police powers under a Republican administration – “have been very quiet when this is happening under Obama.”
Klein asked if concerns that federal agencies are buying for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition over the last year meant America is heading toward some sort of military-style control.
“I think the potential is there,” Benjamin replied, “and the fact that 10 years after 9/11 the U.S. is still keeping the American people in the state of fear about terrorism and using that to take billions and billions of our tax dollars to use to set up these kind of facilities and equip our local law-enforcement agencies with military equipment and potentially really be turning us into a society where Big Brother is watching us all the time, I think is extremely troubling.”
The astronomical growth in federal firepower comes at a time when Democratic lawmakers and President Obama are trying to reduce the availability of guns for American citizens, following the Dec. 14 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn.
A law went into effect in the state of New York on Jan. 15 banning so-called assault weapons and limiting ammunition magazines to seven rounds.
Just yesterday, Colorado’s governor signed into law a measure expanding requirements for background checks and another putting a 15-round limit on ammunition magazines.
Gun-rights supporters are fighting back in both states.
The National Rifle Association announced today that it has joined the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association in a lawsuit challenging the New York law.
Weld County Sheriff John Cooke said he and many other county sheriffs “won’t bother enforcing” the new laws, because it would be impossible to keep track of whether gun owners are meeting the new requirements.
He says the laws are “feel-good, knee-jerk reactions that are unenforceable” and would “give a false sense of security.”
As WND reported, similar sentiments have been expressed by Maricopa County Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio and sheriffs in Missouri, California, Kansas, Montana and in dozens of counties in several states across the country.
Weld has joined the list of at least 340 sheriffs who have vowed to uphold the Constitution against gun-control measures that violate Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
The sheriffs’ push-back against the gun measures is significant because, “The bills are a model for what they’ll try to push in Congress,” said Independence Institute research director and Denver University law professor Dave Kopel.
“Colorado is a pawn for the Obama-Biden plan,” he added.
That plan is moving forward in Congress, although not even Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid could get Democrats to go along with banning “assault weapons.”
Earlier this week, Reid told Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., that her measure to ban those weapons would not be part of a sweeping bill restricting gun rights. She said Reid decided the ban had little chance of surviving a vote in the Senate.
Feinstein said she will be able to offer the ban as an amendment instead. But AP suggested that by pushing it back to that level, Senate leaders believe it will have a hard time passing.
Feinstein sponsored the 1994 assault weapons ban that expired in 2004. Her current proposal would have banned 157 different types of weapons and ammunition magazines.
All of these gun-control measures have some concerned about outright confiscation of guns.
WND reported three weeks ago that the City Council in Guntersville, Ala. proposed to give police officers the authority to “disarm individuals, if necessary,” during an emergency or crisis. The council quickly backed down after an outcry when the story hit the Internet.
Such blatant grabs for guns are not new in the U.S. Less than a year ago, the Second Amendment Foundation fought a court battle over a North Carolina regulation that banned firearms and ammunition outside the home during any declared emergency, and won.
A provision in a Washington-state gun-control bill that failed in the state House last week was so draconian that even its sponsors backtracked or denied any knowledge of it when they were confronted about it.
As Seattle Times columnist Danny Westneat reported, the “Orwellian” measure would allow the county sheriff to inspect the homes of owners of so-called “assault weapons” to ensure the weapons were stored properly.
In the post-Newtown debate, Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke speaks for many of the nation’s sheriffs in saying such firearms seizure plans are flat-out unconstitutional and they won’t enforce them.
Authorities confiscated firearms in New Orleans in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
Thousands of weapons – legally obtained and owned – were simply grabbed from citizens after New Orleans Police Superintendent P. Edwin Compass III announced, “Only law enforcement are allowed to have weapons.”
In a series of videos, the NRA has documented the stunning weapons grab by police in New Orleans, assembling videos that show them physically taking weapons from individuals, including one woman who was stunned when officers threw her against her kitchen wall because she had a small handgun for self-defense.
The not-to-be-forgotten images, Part 1:
Part 2:
The police actions – many of the victims describe the gun confiscation as out-and-out theft – left New Orleans’ residents, who had been prepared to stand their ground and defend themselves from thugs and looters running amok, completely defenseless.
WND reported this week a new poll indicated only one in five gun owners would be willing to give up their firearms if the government demanded it.
“In other words, the government has a huge fight on its hands if it tries to implement a gun confiscation program,” said pollster Fritz Wenzel of Wenzel Strategies.
Nearly half of the nation’s households have at least one gun, according to a 2011 Gallup poll. The 2010 U.S. Census counted nearly 115 million households. Since President Obama took office in 2009, more than 65 million background checks have been conducted on gun purchases.
The push to limit the gun-rights of citizens comes as the federal government seeks to expand both its firepower and its reach. WND has reported on growing federal police power across dozens of government agencies for more than a decade and a half.
In 1997, WND exposed the fact that 60,000 federal agents were enforcing more than 3,000 criminal laws. The report prompted Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America to remark: “Good grief, that’s a standing army. … It’s outrageous.”
Also in 1997, as part of an ongoing series on the militarization of the federal government, WND reported armed, “environment crime” cops employed by the Environmental Protection Agency and a federal law enforcement program had trained 325,000 prospective federal police since 1970.
WND also reported on thousands of armed officers in the Inspectors’ General office and a gun-drawn raid on a local flood control center to haul off 40 boxes of paperwork.
WND further reported a plan by then-Delaware Sen. Joe Biden to hire hundreds of armed Hong Kong policemen in dozens of U.S. federal agencies to counter Asian organized crime in America.
In 1999, Farah warned there were more than 80,000 armed federal law enforcement agents, constituting “the virtual standing army over which the Founding Fathers had nightmares.” Today, that number has nearly doubled.
Also in 1999, WND reported plans made for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, or FEMA, to use military and police forces to deal with Y2K.
In 2000, WND CEO Joseph Farah discussed a Justice Department report on the growth of federal police agents under President Clinton, something Farah labeled “the biggest arms buildup in the history of the federal government – and it’s not taking place in the Defense Department.”
A 2001 report warned of a persistent campaign by the Department of the Interior, this time following 9/11, to gain police powers for its agents.
In 2008, WND reported on proposed rules to expand the military’s use inside U.S. borders to prevent “environmental damage” or respond to “special events” and to establish policies for “military support for civilian law enforcement.”


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/03/dhs-stonewalling-on-big-ammo-buildup/#jSjXjwvVrofLVTyp.99 

Conservative Musings