CALIFORNIA: AN ACT OF TERRORISM OR OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE…WHICH WAS IT???

obama 138

Now there are those occasions, however rare, when I don’t quite agree with Rudy Giuliani on certain issues.  But as the former mayor of New York City during 9/11 and a U.S. associate attorney general under President Reagan, I find it difficult, if not impossible to disagree with him when it comes to defining what it was that took place in San Bernadino, Calif., this past Wednesday.  I agree wholeheartedly with America’s Mayor when he describes it as being unquestionably an “act of terror”.  And he then, and rather bluntly, opined that if, at this point, one could not conclude that it was an act of terror, then “you’re a moron.”

Of course what Mayor Giuliani was referencing here is the shooting that took place at the Inland Regional Center on Dec. 2 where 14 people were killed and another 21 were wounded. The ‘suspects’ in this shooting, who were eventually shot by police, were Tashfeen Malik, from Pakistan, and Syed Rizwan Farook, apparently a U.S. citizen who it has been reported was a “devout Muslim.”  And while our president has gone to great pains to portray this tragedy as being anything but an act of terrorism, the more we find out about these who perpetrated this heinous act, the more that becomes the only possible conclusion.

Yesterday during an appearance on Fox’s America’s Newsroom Giuliani told the show’s host, Bill Hemmer, “The question here is not, is it an act of terror? We’re beyond that. When you’ve got two assault weapons, two handguns, you’re in body armor, you got a home that’s boobytrapped. You’ve been practicing to do this.  Sure, it may have been motivated by some argument in a party, but this is a premeditated act of terror.”  Makes sense to me.  I mean is a guy who’s simply pissed off at his coworkers going to spend time necessary to amass the amount of weaponry that they had and to build pipe bombs?  Call me crazy, but I just don’t think so.

Hemmer said, “It may or may not have been. If you put the pieces together, his wife drove the vehicle to the facility in all likelihood because that’s why he left the meeting and went outside. And perhaps that’s when he changed and got armored-up. Does that make sense to you?”  To which Giuliani responded by saying, “It makes sense to me that it’s an act of terror.”  He went on to say, “If you can’t come to the conclusion at this point that this is an act of terror, you should find something else to do for a living than being in law enforcement. I mean, you’re a moron.”  He went on to say, “This is an act of terror without any question.”

Rudy said, “Two assault weapons, two handguns, booby-trapped home, body armor, a home that looks like they were preparing for war or some kind of battle. So, it’s an act of terror.”  He continued, “The real question is what’s the motivation? Is this part of, is ISIL, the Islamic State’s plot? Is it part of some other plot? Is it homegrown jihadism or is it just insanity? Those are the issues that are out there.”  He then went on, “There are a lot of suggestions that it has a connection to the Arab, Islamic faith,” said Giuliani.  Rudy pointed out that Farook had gone to Saudi Arabia and gotten an online bride and these are tactics encouraged by ISIS.

And yet it was courtesy of a very carefully crafted statement issued later that very same day from the Oval Office that Barry “Almighty’, and rather stubbornly so, held onto the cockamamie notion that it could still very likely be nothing more than yet another incidence of workplace violence. Barry told the nation that it “is possible” that the mass murder in San Bernardino on Wednesday was “terrorist-related” but that it also could have been “workplace-related.”  And it was later in his statement that he suggested it might have been a mix of both.  He just could bring himself to admit that it might be terrorism.

Barry would say of these cold-blooded killers, “We don’t know at this point the extent of their plans.”  And he added that, “We do not know their motivations.”  And he then went on to say, “It is possible that this was terrorist-related, but we don’t know.” And he added, “It’s also possible that this was workplace-related.”  And said, “Our expectation is, is that this may take some time before we’re able to sort it all through.”  And he said, “There may be mixed motives involved in this, which makes the investigation more complicated.”  Look, if this case is complicated it’s only because Barry is trying to ‘make’ it at least appear that way.

Look, this case is pretty cut and dry, but that didn’t keep Barry from saying that one of the things that needs to be looked at is “the nature of the workplace relationship between the individual and his superiors.”  Here are some key excerpts from the Barry’s statement, which can be read in full at the White House website:

“We do know that the two individuals who were killed were equipped with weapons and appeared to have access to additional weaponry at their homes.  But we don’t know why they did it.  We don’t know at this point the extent of their plans.  We do not know their motivations. 

“And I just received a briefing from FBI Director Comey, as well as Attorney General Lynch, indicating the course of their investigation.  At this point, this is now a FBI investigation. That’s been done in cooperation and consultation with local law enforcement.  It is possible that this was terrorist-related, but we don’t know.  It’s also possible that this was workplace-related.  And until the FBI has been able to conduct what are going to be a large number of interviews, until we understand the nature of the workplace relationship between the individual and his superiors — because he worked with the organization where this terrible shooting took place — until all the social media and electronic information has been exploited, we’re just not going to be able to answer those questions…..

“Our expectation is, is that this may take some time before we’re able to sort it all through.  There may be mixed motives involved in this, which makes the investigation more complicated.  But rest assured that we will get to the bottom of this.”

So as the days have passed since this most recent tragedy, it’s becoming all the more obvious that there are far more people who agree with Rudy’s assessment of the events that occurred than agree with the rather naïve assessment stubbornly maintained by our Muslim sympathizer of a president, Barry “Almighty.”  And as to be expected, Barry’s very first response was to call for new and more restrictive gun laws.  And this was at the very same time that his spokesmoron readily admitted that stricter gun laws would not have prevented this atrocity.  And besides, California already has some of the strictest gun laws in the entire country.

Barry’s motto is, “Never let a crisis go to waste.”  Barry, as well as the number one contender for his job, saw this tragedy as being nothing more than as an opportunity. An opportunity to once again go after law abiding gun owners as if they are somehow to blame.  I’ll tell you who’s to blame, and it’s not the NRA or any of us who believe in our Second Amendment right to own a gun.  We already have thousands of gun laws on the books, most of which are simply allowed to go unenforced.  But Barry has a very sinister reason for not enforcing these laws.  Barry hopes to increase such incidents as this in the hope of convincing enough Americans that NEW, more restrictive, laws are needed.

Advertisements

One response to “CALIFORNIA: AN ACT OF TERRORISM OR OF WORKPLACE VIOLENCE…WHICH WAS IT???

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s