By Christopher G. Adamo – In the greatness that was once America, when truth prevailed over “political correctness” and justice was an honorable pursuit, the nation’s leaders would have begun by giving the benefit of the doubt to their countrymen, presuming innocence until guilt might be proven. Sadly, that course of action has been completely upended in recent years, as any major occurrence, whether natural or artificially instigated, is immediately “interpreted” and thereafter discussed by leftist politicians and their media lapdogs in whatever manner best suits the liberal agenda. In the process, truth itself becomes the initial casualty.
Consequently, Hurricane Sandy and the devastation it wrought were not evaluated with the intention of strengthening municipal infrastructures in hopes of better withstanding future tempests of nature. Rather, in the wake of the storm, all energies have been devoted to blaming “global warming” and then further sapping governmental coffers of taxpayer dollars, ostensibly to promote “green energy” development as the universally presumed cure.
Much more ominously however, the smoldering resentment towards Western civilization among radical Islamists has been deliberately and meticulously ignored by the left. Rather than drawing the proper conclusion from the mounting evidence of their visceral malevolence, every allowance is offered to justify the ongoing cavalcade of outrages and vile attacks against innocent westerners and the American ideal in particular. This insane reaction to a burgeoning and hostile foreign culture stems from an apparent personal affinity towards it among this nation’s leaders, and in a perverse sense, its perceived value as a weapon by which to advance their hard-left agenda.
By this means, the American left is doing its best to render the nation open and vulnerable to belligerent outside forces who would gladly see its demise. The horrific events in Boston, and the reaction to them by the nation’s liberal mouthpieces, represent incontrovertible proof that among those who have reached high office in this country, a decidedly anti-American sentiment prevails. What would once have constituted flagrant disloyalty to the nation is now offered as erudite analysis and policy.
In the wake of the 2009 Fort Hood massacre in which Major Nidal Hasan, an openly Islamist Army “Chaplain” suddenly fired on Army personnel while yelling “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is great), killing thirteen and injuring thirty, the primary stated focus of Army Chief of Staff George Casey was to prevent “backlash against some of our Muslim soldiers.” In essence, the proper reaction to the killing spree of a traitorous Muslim insurgent was not to prevent other Americans from becoming similar targets, but to protect Muslims from the anticipated outrage of those Americans.
No less an affront to the good people of this nation were all of the liberal grandstanding episodes in the wake of the Aurora Colorado movie theater and Sandy Hook Elementary school shootings. Relishing these opportunities to exploit horrendous tragedies in service to their relentless effort to void the Second Amendment and disarm the American people, liberal media types and their Democrat cohorts have engaged in a disgraceful misrepresentation of those events, while suppressing and disparaging any worthwhile means of thwarting future repeats.
Several cases of impending mass murders which were prevented by armed citizens have occurred since Aurora and Sandy Hook, and are well-documented. However, these events are almost completely ignored by the media/Democrat establishment. The possibility of actually enabling citizens to protect themselves from crazed assailants is of no interest to leftists and their dreams of an unarmed and thoroughly compliant populace.
So it was profoundly ironic that, on the very day the United States Senate actually descended into debate over how to effectively undermine the Second Amendment while feigning loyalty to the Bill of Rights, a horrific attack against America was perpetrated at the finish line of the Boston Marathon. In the midst of the crowded event, two improvised terrorist bombs detonated, killing three and severely injuring more than a hundred and seventy others. In a terribly sad reflection of the corrupt and duplicitous character of the modern political establishment, among those not directly affected by the blasts, a major concern was how those in power might capitalize on the event to advance their political interests.
America’s leaders, including Barack Obama are loathe to suggest that any Islamist attack on this country might be construed as “terrorism.” In a despicable affront to the sensibilities of the American people, the Hasan killings have been officially characterized as “workplace violence.” In contrast, the United States government has readily classified mere grassroots political opposition as “domestic terrorism.” Those who feared that liberal activists would follow this course in the aftermath of the Boston bombings have sadly, but not surprisingly been proven correct.
Within hours of the disaster, Senator Diane Feinstein (D.-CA) was on record saying “It could be foreign, it could be home grown.” Predictably, MSNBC loon Chris Matthews suggested that the location of the bombs was possibly directed against Democrats and, remaining purposefully ignorant of Obama cronies Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn (among many others), casually asserted that “domestic terrorists tend to be on the far right.” In a comparable insinuation, former Obama Administration political strategist David Axelrod pondered if the date, April 15 (known by many as “Tax Day”) bore any relation to the timing of the bombings. Interestingly, Barack Obama altogether avoided the word “terrorism” in his first speech pertaining to the event, perhaps out of concern that this might ultimately prove to be just another embarrassing episode of “workplace violence.”
It is impossible to escape noticing that leftists are once again fervently hoping that somebody related to the NRA or the Tea Party can be implicated in the Boston Marathon terrorist attack. Within hours of the July 2012 Aurora Colorado movie theater shootings, ABC News “reporters” Brian Ross and George Stephanopoulis exuberantly speculated that the perpetrator, a “James Holmes” might be the same individual who was registered as a member of the Aurora Tea Party. Likewise, virtually every early liberal media analysis of the 2011 Tucson massacre by Jared Loughner (whose acquaintances characterized him as undeniably left leaning) postulated that his violent spree was likely motivated by right wing sentiments. Since December 16, liberals have incessantly asserted that Adam Lanza’s rampage at Sandy Hook Elementary School somehow directly reflected on the National Rifle Association.
It is of little consequence to the left that such activity as bombing innocent Americans at a celebrated sports event or killing helpless children and theater goers is simply not in the character of the Tea Party movement, and that directing the attention of law enforcement down that rabbit trail only weakens real efforts to prevent such occurrences. The actual consequences of liberal policy, and the vile fraud needed to implement it, are secondary to the perceived importance of creating the brave new world which they envision.
The people of Boston, and all of America, had better learn to look past the sanctimony of liberal propagandists and recognize the sinister nature of the real enemy they face. Otherwise, they can only expect more of the same.